A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Double balloon protection during carotid artery stenting for vulnerable carotid stenosis reduces the incidence of new brain lesions. | LitMetric

Background: The use of distal filter protection alone is associated with a high risk of ischemic complications when vulnerable carotid stenosis is treated by carotid artery stenting (CAS). Double balloon protection, a combination of distal balloon protection and proximal balloon occlusion, can be utilized. We assessed the outcome and complications of the double balloon protection method for vulnerable carotid stenosis.

Methods: Among 130 patients who underwent CAS from 2009 to 2014, we enrolled the following patients: those whose target lesion was vulnerable as evaluated by MRI, i.e., a signal ratio of plaque to posterior cervical muscle on T1-weighted images before CAS of ≥1.5, and those who underwent diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) studies within 48 h after the procedure. Ninety patients were enrolled. We investigated DWI findings of the double balloon protection group compared with those of the simple distal balloon protection and distal filter protection groups.

Results: Sixty-four patients (71 %) underwent double balloon protection, 15 patients (17 %) simple distal balloon protection, and 11 patients (12 %) distal filter protection. Symptomatic embolic complications and new lesions on DWI after CAS were significantly less common in patients undergoing double balloon protection compared to distal balloon protection or distal filter protection (0 % vs. 20 %, 9 %, P < 0.01, and 30 % vs. 67 %, 82 %, P < 0.01, respectively). Logistic regression analysis also identified the odds ratio of double balloon protection for new lesions on DWI after CAS of 0.23 (95 % confidence interval: 0.07-0.70, P < 0.01) compared to simple distal protections.

Conclusions: In the patients who underwent CAS for vulnerable carotid stenosis, double balloon protection was an independent significant factor associated with a reduction in the risk of new lesions on DWI after the procedure compared to conventional distal protections.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-016-2816-2DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

balloon protection
40
double balloon
24
distal filter
16
filter protection
16
distal balloon
16
protection
14
vulnerable carotid
12
balloon
10
carotid artery
8
artery stenting
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!