| 1. |
- Aad, G., et al.
(författare)
-
- 2010
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Ederle, Joerg, et al.
(författare)
-
Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 1474-547X. ; 375:9719, s. 985-997
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Stents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy. Methods The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470. Findings The trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4.0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3.2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% CI 0.77-2.11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8.5% in the stenting group compared with 5.2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1.69, 1.16-2.45, p=0.006), Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1.92, 1.27-2.89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2.76, 1.16-6.56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0.0197). Interpretation Completion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Cao, P., et al.
(författare)
-
Diagnostic Methods
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - 1532-2165. ; 42, s. 13-32
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Non-invasive vascular studies can provide crucial information on the presence, location, and severity of critical limb ischaemia (CLI), as well as the initial assessment or treatment planning. Ankle-brachial index with Doppler ultrasound, despite limitations in diabetic and end-stage renal failure patients, is the first-line evaluation of CLI. In this group of patients, toe-brachial index measurement may better establish the diagnosis. Other non-invasive measurements, such as segmental limb pressure, continuous-wave Doppler analysis and pulse volume recording, are of limited accuracy. Transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO(2)) measurement may be of value when rest pain and ulcerations of the foot are present. Duplex ultrasound is the most important non-invasive tool in CLI patients combining haemodynamic evaluation with imaging modality. Computed tomography angiography (CIA) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) are the next imaging studies in the algorithm for CLI. Both CTA and MRA have been proven effective in aiding the decision-making of clinicians and accurate planning of intervention. The data acquired with CIA and MRA can be manipulated in a multiplanar and 3D fashion and can offer exquisite detail. CIA results are generally equivalent to MRA, and both compare favourably with contrast angiography. The individual use of different imaging modalities depends on local availability, experience, and costs. Contrast angiography represents the gold standard, provides detailed information about arterial anatomy, and is recommended when revascularisation is needed. (C) 2011 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 8. |
- Dick, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Follow-up after Revascularisation
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - 1532-2165. ; 42:Suppl. 2, s. 75-90
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Structured follow-up after revascularisation for chronic critical limb ischaemia (CLI) aims at sustained treatment success and continued best patient care. Thereby, efforts need to address three fundamental domains: (A) best medical therapy, both to protect the arterial reconstruction locally and to reduce atherosclerotic burden systemically; (B) surveillance of the arterial reconstruction; and (C) timely initiation of repeat interventions. As most CLI patients are elderly and frail, sustained resolution of CLI and preserved ambulatory capacity may decide over independent living and overall prognosis. Despite this importance, previous guidelines have largely ignored follow-up after CLI; arguably because of a striking lack of evidence and because of a widespread assumption that, in the context of CLI, efficacy of initial revascularisation will determine prognosis during the short remaining life expectancy. This chapter of the current CLI guidelines aims to challenge this disposition and to recommend evidentially best clinical practice by critically appraising available evidence in all of the above domains, including antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy, clinical surveillance, use of duplex ultrasound, and indications for and preferred type of repeat interventions for failing and failed reconstructions. However, as corresponding studies are rarely performed among CLI patients specifically, evidence has to be consulted that derives from expanded patient populations. Therefore, most recommendations are based on extrapolations or subgroup analyses, which leads to an almost systematic degradation of their strength. Endovascular reconstruction and surgical bypass are considered separately, as are specific contexts such as diabetes or renal failure; and critical issues are highlighted throughout to inform future studies. (C) 2011 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 9. |
- Diehm, N., et al.
(författare)
-
Management of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Medical Therapy
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - 1532-2165. ; 42:Suppl. 2, s. 33-42
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Critical limb ischaemia (CLI) is a particularly severe manifestation of lower limb atherosclerosis posing a major threat to both limb and life of affected patients. Besides arterial revascularisation, risk-factor modification and administration of antiplatelet therapy is a major goal in the treatment of CLI patients. Key elements of cardiovascular risk management are smoking cessation and treatment of hyperlipidaemia with dietary modification or statins. Moreover, arterial hypertension and diabetes mellitus should be adequately treated. In CLI patients not suitable for arterial revascularisation or subsequent to unsuccessful revascularisation, parenteral prostanoids may be considered. CLI patients undergoing surgical revascularisation should be treated with beta blockers. At present, neither gene nor stem-cell therapy can be recommended outside clinical trials. Of note, walking exercise is contraindicated in CLI patients due to the risk of worsening pre-existing or causing new ischaemic wounds. CLI patients are oftentimes medically frail and exhibit significant comorbidities. Co-existing coronary heart and carotid as well as renal artery disease should be managed according to current guidelines. Considering the above-mentioned treatment goals, interdisciplinary treatment approaches for CLI patients are warranted. Aim of the present manuscript is to discuss currently existing evidence for both the management of cardiovascular risk factors and treatment of co-existing disease and to deduct specific treatment recommendations. (C) 2011 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 10. |
- Lepantalo, M., et al.
(författare)
-
Diabetic Foot
- 2011
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. - 1532-2165. ; 42:Suppl. 2, s. 60-74
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Ulcerated diabetic foot is a complex problem. Ischaemia, neuropathy and infection are the three pathological components that lead to diabetic foot complications, and they frequently occur together as an aetiologic triad. Neuropathy and ischaemia are the initiating factors, most often together as neuroischaemia, whereas infection is mostly a consequence. The role of peripheral arterial disease in diabetic foot has long been underestimated as typical ischaemic symptoms are less frequent in diabetics with ischaemia than in non-diabetics. Furthermore, the healing of a neuroischaemic ulcer is hampered by microvascular dysfunction. Therefore, the threshold for revascularising neuroischaemic ulcers should be lower than that for purely ischaemic ulcers. Previous guidelines have largely ignored these specific demands related to ulcerated neuroischaemic diabetic feet. Any diabetic foot ulcer should always be considered to have vascular impairment unless otherwise proven. Early referral, non-invasive vascular testing, imaging and intervention are crucial to improve diabetic foot ulcer healing and to prevent amputation. Timing is essential, as the window of opportunity to heal the ulcer and save the leg is easily missed. This chapter underlines the paucity of data on the best way to diagnose and treat these diabetic patients. Most of the studies dealing with neuroischaemic diabetic feet are not comparable in terms of patient populations, interventions or outcome. Therefore, there is an urgent need for a paradigm shift in diabetic foot care; that is, a new approach and classification of diabetics with vascular impairment in regard to clinical practice and research. A multidisciplinary approach needs to implemented systematically with a vascular surgeon as an integrated member. New strategies must be developed and implemented for diabetic foot patients with vascular impairment, to improve healing, to speed up healing rate and to avoid amputation, irrespective of the intervention technology chosen. Focused studies on the value of predictive tests, new treatment modalities as well as selective and targeted strategies are needed. As specific data on ulcerated neuroischaemic diabetic feet are scarce, recommendations are often of low grade. (C) 2011 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
