Why the study?
Does simultaneous bilateral carotid stenting improve outcomes and reduce endpoint events compared to standard medical management in patients with symptomatic bilateral high-grade carotid stenosis?
Does simultaneous bilateral carotid stenting improve outcomes and reduce endpoint events compared to standard medical management in patients with symptomatic bilateral high-grade carotid stenosis?
Simultaneous bilateral carotid stenting appears to be a safe and effective alternative to standard medical management for symptomatic bilateral high-grade carotid stenosis, significantly reducing 1-year endpoint events.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
SBCAS may be more effective and safer than medical management alone in selected patients; leaves open need for randomized confirmation in bilateral high-grade stenosis.
BACKGROUND This retrospective clinical investigation aimed to evaluate the short-term effectiveness and safety of SBCAS for symptomatic bilateral high-grade CS. MATERIAL AND METHODS From 2009 to 2014, 145 patients were recruited. Among them, 70 underwent SBCAS, and other 75 patients underwent SAMM and served as controls. The immediate postprocedural complications and postprocedural neurological evaluation, as well as restenosis at 6-month and 1-year follow-ups in the SBCAS group are reported. Additionally, baseline risk factors for ischemic stroke, adverse effects of drugs, and outcomes at 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS Our data did not reveal significant differences between the 2 groups in baseline risk factors for ischemic stroke. In the SBCAS group, both HPS (5.7%) and HD (40%) occurred, but they were not very severe, and no patients had postprocedural neurological deficit. Moreover, restenosis only occurred in 3 patients at 3 stent placement sites (4.3%) at 1-year follow-up. Adverse effects of drugs did not occur in SBCAS group, but adverse effects of Bayer aspirin and Lipitor occurred in 4 patients (5.4%) and 18 patients (24.3%), respectively, at 6-month follow-up in the control group. Furthermore, there were significant differences in outcomes between the 2 groups at 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year follow-ups, in that NIHSS, CS ratio, and incidence of endpoint events, as well as 1-year cumulative probability of endpoint events, were all lower in the SBCAS group than in the control group (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Compared to SAMM, we found that SBCAS was more effective and safer for symptomatic bilateral high-grade CS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ye et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: