Why the study?
Is primary stenting necessary compared to selective stenting during percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for iliac artery occlusive disease?
Is primary stenting necessary compared to selective stenting during percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for iliac artery occlusive disease?
This article evaluates an 11-year experience to determine whether selective stenting is sufficient or if primary stenting is necessary for iliac artery occlusive disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observational iliac stenting data should not change practice; leaves open need for randomized comparison of selective versus primary approaches.
Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) has become one of the initial treatment options in patients with iliac artery occlusive disease. Stents have been recommended to correct procedural complications and improve long-term patency. Many series advocate routine stent placement after an otherwise uncomplicated PTA (primary stenting) in an attempt to prevent recurrent disease. Currently, many physicians in the United States seem to use stents in the iliac artery more liberally, even on a routine basis. There is little evidence to support this practice, however. It is still unclear whether a stent should be inserted primarily or selectively. This article provides the data from an 11-year experience of angioplasty with selective stenting for iliac artery occlusive lesions and reviews the current literatures on the iliac artery stent placement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kudo et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: