Neurosurgery · 2011
Endovascular stenting of extracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissections: a systematic review of the literature.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pham Martin H, Rahme Rudy J, Arnaout Omar, Hurley Michael C, Bernstein Richard A, Batjer H Hunt, Bendok Bernard R
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Carotid and vertebral artery dissections are a leading cause of stroke in young individuals.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the published safety and efficacy of endovascular stenting for extracranial artery dissection.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify all cases of endovascular management of extracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissections.
RESULTS: For carotid dissections, our review yielded 31 published reports including 140 patients (153 vessels). Reported etiologies were traumatic (48%, n = 64), spontaneous (37%, n = 49), and iatrogenic (16%, n = 21). The technical success rate of stenting was 99%, and the procedural complication rate was 1.3%. Mean angiographic follow-up was 12.8 months (range, 2-72 months) and revealed in-stent stenosis or occlusion in 2% of patients. Mean clinical follow-up was 17.7 months (range, 1-72 months), and neurological events were seen in 1.4% of patients. For vertebral artery dissections, our review revealed 8 reports including 10 patients (12 vessels). Etiologies were traumatic (60%, n = 6), spontaneous (20%, n = 2), and iatrogenic (20%, n = 2). There was a 100% technical success rate. The mean angiographic follow-up period was 7.5 months (range, 2-12 months). No new neurological events were reported during a mean clinical follow-up period of 26.4 months (range, 3-55 months).
CONCLUSION: Endovascular management of extracranial arterial dissection continues to evolve. Current experience shows that this treatment option is safe and technically feasible. Prospective randomized trials compared with medical management are needed to further elucidate the role of stenting.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the published safety and efficacy of endovascular stenting for extracranial artery dissection.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify all cases of endovascular management of extracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissections.
RESULTS: For carotid dissections, our review yielded 31 published reports including 140 patients (153 vessels). Reported etiologies were traumatic (48%, n = 64), spontaneous (37%, n = 49), and iatrogenic (16%, n = 21). The technical success rate of stenting was 99%, and the procedural complication rate was 1.3%. Mean angiographic follow-up was 12.8 months (range, 2-72 months) and revealed in-stent stenosis or occlusion in 2% of patients. Mean clinical follow-up was 17.7 months (range, 1-72 months), and neurological events were seen in 1.4% of patients. For vertebral artery dissections, our review revealed 8 reports including 10 patients (12 vessels). Etiologies were traumatic (60%, n = 6), spontaneous (20%, n = 2), and iatrogenic (20%, n = 2). There was a 100% technical success rate. The mean angiographic follow-up period was 7.5 months (range, 2-12 months). No new neurological events were reported during a mean clinical follow-up period of 26.4 months (range, 3-55 months).
CONCLUSION: Endovascular management of extracranial arterial dissection continues to evolve. Current experience shows that this treatment option is safe and technically feasible. Prospective randomized trials compared with medical management are needed to further elucidate the role of stenting.