Comparison of periprocedural and long term outcomes of proximal versus distal cerebral protection method during carotid artery stenting.

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the periprocedural and one-year outcomes of two different cerebral protection systems used during carotid artery stenting (CAS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We enrolled 90 consecutive patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CAS with a proximal flow blockage protection system (mean age 69.7 ± 8) or distal protection with a filter (mean age 70.8 ± 7).

RESULTS

CAS was performed successively on 89 patients (99 %). Adverse events were defined as major stroke, minor stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, and death. Two strokes, one TIA, one death, and one myocardial infarction were observed in-hospital. There were no significant differences in safety or benefits between the proximal flow blockage embolic protection system (n = 45) and the distal filter protection system (n = 45) in terms of clinically apparent cerebral embolism, TIA, death, or myocardial infarction during the periprocedural stage or during the one-year follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Although it has been shown that the proximal flow blockage cerebral protection system decreases the risk of silent cerebral embolism, it has no advantage over the distal filter protection system in terms of adverse cerebrovascular or cardiac events during the periprocedural stage or during the long-term follow-up period.