4.4 Article

Transient in-stent stenosis at mid-term angiographic follow-up in patients treated with SILK flow diverter stents: incidence, clinical significance and long-term follow-up

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROINTERVENTIONAL SURGERY
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 166-170

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013928

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background L ittle is known about in-stent stenosis (ISS) in patients with aneurysms treated with flow diverter (FD) stents. The reported incidence in the literature varies significantly. Objective The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, severity, distribution, clinical significance, and possible predictors for ISS. Methods Between July 2012 and June 2016 we retrospectively reviewed all patients treated with SILK FDs in our center. Only cases with short-term (4 +/- 2 months) and long-term (> 1 year) follow-ups with digital subtraction angiograms were included. ISS was graded as mild (< 25%), moderate (25-50%) or severe (> 50%). The following predictors for ISS were assessed: gender, age, the presence of subarachnoid hemorrhage, aneurysm size, location, occlusion status, and poststenting angioplasty. Results Thirty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. At mid-term follow-up, ISS was observed in 16/36 patients (44%). Eleven patients (69%) had mild ISS, three (19%) moderate, and two (12%) severe ISS. ISS was diffuse in 11 patients (69%) and focal in five patients (31%). All patients were asymptomatic. Thirteen patients were maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy and three on aspirin alone. At long-term follow-up, complete ISS resolution was seen in 11 patients, improvement in three and worsening in two patients. No de novo ISS occurrence was observed. On univariate analysis there was no significant predictor for ISS. Conclusions Transient ISS after FD deployment is a common asymptomatic finding on mid-term angiographic follow-up. Complete resolution or improvement at long-term follow-up is seen in most patients who are maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据