Search

Introduction: In our institute, most cases of carotid artery stenosis are treated by carotid artery stenting (CAS) with an open-cell stent and double-balloon protection, even if plaques are unstable. This study was performed to examine the outcome of CAS with an open-cell stent and double-balloon protection for unstable plaques. Methods: A total of 184 CAS procedures in our institute between October 2010 and February 2018 were assessed. Ultrasonography findings of low-echo plaques, plaque ulceration, or both were defined as unstable plaques. A plaque-to-muscle ratio (PMR) of >1.8 on T1-weighted black blood imaging using spin-echo was also defined as an unstable plaque. Seventy-four unstable plaques on ultrasonography and 86 unstable plaques evaluated by PMR were included. Open-cell stents and double-balloon protection (proximal balloon protection during lesion crossing and distal balloon protection after lesion crossing) were used in all cases. Results: On ultrasonography, perioperative asymptomatic thromboembolization was significantly more frequent in the unstable plaque group (39/74, 52.7%) than in the stable plaque group (41/110, 37.3%, p=0.0384). Asymptomatic thromboembolization was also significantly more frequent in the PMR >1.8 group (44/86, 51.2%) than in the PMR <1.8 group (36/98, 36.7%, p=0.0489). However, symptomatic thromboembolization was rare (n=5, 2.7%), and all of these patients had minor stroke. During the 4-year follow-up, the risk of ipsilateral stroke was 0.28% and 0.27% per year in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic lesions, respectively. Conclusions: The outcomes of CAS with an open-cell stent and double-balloon protection are acceptable. This method is effective and safe, even if carotid artery stenosis comprises unstable plaques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction We have observed that aneurysms treated by insufficient coil embolization and filled with contrast agent immediately after the procedure are often completely occluded at follow-up. However, there are limited studies showing progressive thrombosis of aneurysms after coil embolization. Herein, we describe our experience with coil embolization for aneurysms, and discuss the factors involved in progressive thrombosis. Methods A total of 255 aneurysms treated by coil embolization in our institute between January 2011 and June 2017 and observed >6 months were included. 'Progressive thrombosis' indicated that aneurysms that were neck remnant (NR) or dome filling (DF) immediately after coil embolization changed to complete obliteration (CO) at the 6-month follow-up digital subtraction angiography. The factors involved in progressive thrombosis were assessed. Results In all aneurysms (n=255), 24 (9.4%) were CO, 82 (32.2%) were NR, and 149 (58.4%) were DF immediately after the procedure. At 6-month digital subtraction angiography, 123 (48.2%) were CO, 95 (37.3%) were NR, and 37 (14.5%) were DF. Retreatment for major recanalization was performed in eight cases (3.1%). One hundred and three aneurysms showed progressive thrombosis. There were significant differences in aneurysm location (P=0.0002), aneurysm dome diameter (P=0.0015), aneurysm neck diameter (P=0.0068), volume embolization ratio (P=0.0054), and endovascular procedure with stent (P=0.0264) between the progressive thrombosis and no thrombosis groups. Conclusions Progressive thrombosis can occur in aneurysms after coil embolization depending on aneurysm location and size, and stent use. Thus, the degree of coil embolization and combination with a stent should be adjusted depending on aneurysm type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]