Comparison of covered stents versus bare metal stents for treatment of chronic atherosclerotic mesenteric arterial disease.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE
To compare outcomes of mesenteric angioplasty and stenting using iCAST covered stents (CS; Atrium, Hudson, NH) or bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI).
METHODS
We reviewed the clinical data of 225 patients (65 male and 160 female; mean age, 72 ± 12 years) treated for CMI at two academic centers (2000-2010). Outcomes were analyzed in patients who had primary intervention or reintervention using BMS (n = 164 patients/197 vessels) or CS (n = 61 patients/67 vessels). End points were freedom from restenosis, symptom recurrence, reinterventions, and patency rates.
RESULTS
Patients in both groups had similar demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, and extent of disease. In the primary intervention group (mean follow-up, 29 ± 12 months), patients treated by CS had higher freedom from restenosis (92% ± 6% vs 53% ± 4%; P = .003), symptom recurrence (92 ± 4% vs 50 ± 5%; P = .003), reintervention (91% ± 6% vs 56% ± 5%; P = .005), and better primary patency at 3 years (92% ± 6% vs 52% ± 5%; P < .003) than for BMS. In the reintervention group (mean follow-up, 24 ± 9 months), patients treated by CS had higher freedom from restenosis (89% ± 10% vs 49% ± 14%; P < .04), symptom recurrence (100% vs 64%± 9%; P = .001), and reintervention (100% vs 72% ± 9%; P = .03) at 1 year, and a trend toward improved primary patency at 1 year (100% vs 63% ± 9%; P = .054). Secondary patency rates were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In this nonrandomized study, CS were associated with less restenosis, recurrences, and reinterventions than BMS in patients undergoing primary interventions or reinterventions for CMI.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.