Faculty Bibliography

INTRODUCTION: Prior neck irradiation may induce atherosclerosis in the carotid artery and is considered an indication for carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). This study sought to evaluate the effect of neck radiation therapy (XRT) on the rate of restenosis and embolic potential in patients undergoing CAS. METHODS: Two hundred ten CAS procedures were performed on 193 patients (XRT [N = 28], non-XRT [N = 182]). Mean follow-up was 347 +/- 339 days (median, 305 days; range, 16-1354 days). Duplex velocity criteria for restenosis after CAS were: >50% restenosis (peak systolic velocity [PSV] > 125 cm/sec, end diastolic velocity [EDV] 40-99 cm/sec, and internal carotid artery to common carotid artery systolic ratio [ICA/CCA] > 2.0); >70% restenosis (PSV>230 cm/sec, EDV>100 cm/sec, and ICA/CCA ratio >4.0). Restenosis >70% was confirmed by digital subtraction angiography. Additional endpoints included groin hematoma, groin pseudoaneurysm, myocardial infarction, stroke, mortality, and the combined myocardial infarction/stroke/mortality rate. Captured particulate data was obtained from microporous filters used during CAS. Nineteen XRT and 128 non-XRT consecutive filters were analyzed. Photomicroscopy was performed along three axes for each filter, and the quantity and size of the captured particles were analyzed using video image analysis software. RESULTS: There were more men (XRT: 85.7% vs. non-XRT: 52.8%, P < .001) and prior surgical neck dissections in the XRT patients (XRT: 82.1% vs. non-XRT: 4.7%, P < .001). Pre-procedural stenosis did not differ significantly betweeen the two groups (XRT: 86.5% +/- 8.9% [range, 70%-99%] vs. non-XRT: 85.5% +/- 8.7% [range 70%-99%], P = NS). Perioperative outcomes, including the composite 30 day stroke/myocardial infarction/mortality rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (XRT: 0% vs. non-XRT: 3.2%, P = NS). Twelve-month freedom from restenosis rates did not differ significantly at the 50% threshold (XRT: 95.5% vs. non-XRT: 90.3%, P = NS) or at the 70% threshold (XRT: 95.5% vs. non-XRT: 96.5%, P = NS). Target lesion revascularization did not differ significantly (XRT: 0% vs. non-XRT: 0.5%, P = NS). Photomicroscopy demonstrated a trend towards increased particle number and size in the XRT filters, however the results did not achieve statistical significance: particle number (XRT: 9.8 +/- 8.4 vs. non-XRT: 9.6 +/- 11.7, P = NS), %patients with particle size >1000 microm (XRT: 47.4% vs. non-XRT: 30.5%, P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the durability of CAS and the characteristics of captured embolic particles are not altered by a history of neck XRT. This supports the safety and efficacy of CAS for the treatment of patients with a history of neck XRT. Prior neck XRT may predispose the patient to the de novo development of stenoses at locations that were not previously treated

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular intervention is increasingly accepted as an alternative to surgery for the treatment of tibial vessel disease. Tibial vessel disease can occur in isolation or in conjunction with disease that involves the proximal lower extremity vasculature (multilevel disease). This study evaluated the overall efficacy of endovascular intervention for tibial vessel disease and whether the requirement for single-level compared with multilevel intervention affected outcomes. METHODS: This study evaluated a consecutive unselected group of patients who underwent an infrapopliteal intervention from November 2002 to February 2008. The primary end points evaluated were technical success, limb salvage, primary patency, and secondary patency. The secondary end points evaluated were 30-day access site (ie, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, and wound infection), intervention site (ie, thrombosis), and systemic (ie, acute renal failure, myocardial infarction, and mortality) complications. Patency and limb salvage were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier life-table analyses and compared using Cox regression analysis. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The study comprised 85 patients, 89 limbs, and 114 procedures. Age was 72.4 +/- 13.1 years, 67% were men, and follow-up was 245.8 +/- 290.8 days. The technical success rate for all procedures was 91%. Limb salvage rates for patients with critical limb ischemia at 6, 12 and 18 months were 85% +/- 0%, 81% +/- 0%, and 69% +/- 0%, respectively. For the complete patient cohort, primary patency rates at 6, 12 and 18 months were 68% +/- 6%, 50% +/- 8%, and 37% +/- 9%, respectively, and secondary patency rates were 81% +/- 5%, 71% +/- 7%, and 63% +/- 8%. Multilevel intervention was associated with significantly improved secondary patency compared with single-level intervention (P = .045). CONCLUSIONS: Patency and limb salvage rates for endovascular treatment of tibial vessel disease in this study are comparable with prior reports and with historical surgical controls. Patients who undergo multilevel intervention involving the tibial vessels exhibit improved secondary patency compared with those who undergo intervention for lesions isolated to the tibial vessels. This may reflect increased distal disease burden for patients who undergo isolated tibial intervention. The study data suggest that the presence of multilevel disease should not preclude an attempt at percutaneous revascularization. Further study is required before formulating definitive recommendations for the endovascular treatment of tibial vessel disease.