Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Use of an embolic protection device during carotid artery stenting is associated with lower periprocedural risk.
Knappich, Christoph; Bohmann, Bianca; Kirchhoff, Felix; Lohe, Vanessa; Naher, Shamsun; Kallmayer, Michael; Eckstein, Hans-Henning; Kuehnl, Andreas.
Afiliación
  • Knappich C; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany christoph.knappich@googlemail.com.
  • Bohmann B; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Kirchhoff F; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Lohe V; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Naher S; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Kallmayer M; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Eckstein HH; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
  • Kuehnl A; Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
J Neurointerv Surg ; 2024 Jun 21.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38906691
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate associations between individual embolic protection device (EPD) use and respective center policy with periprocedural outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS:

This analysis is based on the nationwide German statutory quality assurance database and was funded by Germany's Federal Joint Committee Innovation Fund (G-BA Innovationsfonds, 01VSF19016 ISAR-IQ). According to their policy towards EPD use, hospitals were categorized as routine EPD (>90%), selective EPD (10-90%), or sporadic EPD (<10%) centers. Primary study outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS:

Overall, 19 302 patients who had undergone CAS between 2013 and 2016 were included. The highest in-hospital stroke or death rate was found in sporadic EPD centers, followed by selective and routine EPD centers (3.1% vs 2.9% vs 1.8%; P<0.001). Across the whole cohort, EPD use was associated with a lower in-hospital stroke or death rate (OR=0.60; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.72). In the multivariate regression analysis, EPD use was independently associated with a lower in-hospital stroke rate (aOR=0.66; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94). Regarding center policy, routine EPD centers showed a significantly lower in-hospital mortality compared with sporadic EPD centers (aOR=0.44; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS:

In a contemporary real-world cohort with low risk of selection bias, EPD use was associated with a lower in-hospital risk of stroke. A center policy of routine EPD use was associated with lower mortality. These data support routine use of EPD during CAS to enhance patient safety.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Neurointerv Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Neurointerv Surg Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Alemania