Impact of Time Interval between Index Event and Stenting on Periprocedural Risk in Patients with Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of time interval between index event and stenting on the periprocedural risk of stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis and to determine the optimal timing of stenting. METHODSThis retrospective study included 491 (322 symptomatic [65.6...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2020-09, Vol.63 (5), p.598-606
Main Authors: Han, Wonsuck, Hwang, Gyojun, Oh, Sung Han, Lee, Jong Joo, Kim, Mi Kyung, Chung, Bong Sub, Rhim, Jong Kook, Sheen, Seung Hun, Kim, Taehyung
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Clinical
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:OBJECTIVEThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of time interval between index event and stenting on the periprocedural risk of stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis and to determine the optimal timing of stenting. METHODSThis retrospective study included 491 (322 symptomatic [65.6%] and 169 asymptomatic [34.4%]) patients undergoing carotid stenting. The symptomatic patients were categorized into Day 0-3, 4-7, 8-10, 11-14, 15-21, and >21 groups according to the time interval between index event and stenting. Periprocedural (≤30 days) risk for clinical (any neurological deterioration) and radiological (new infarction on postprocedural diffusion-weighted imaging) events of stenting in each time interval versus asymptomatic stenosis was calculated with logistic regression analysis adjusted for confounders, and provided as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTSOverall clinical event rate (4.3%) of stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis was higher than that for asymptomatic stenosis (1.2%; OR, 3.979 [95% CI, 1.093-14.489]; p=0.036). Stenting in Day 0-3 (13.2%; OR, 10.997 [95% CI, 2.333-51.826]; p=0.002) and Day 4-7 (8.3%; OR, 6.775 [95% CI, 1.382-33.227]; p=0.018) was associated with high risk for clinical events. However, the clinical event rates in stenting after 7 days from index event (Day 8-10, 1.8%; Day 11-14, 2.5%; Day 15-21, 0%; Day >21, 2.9%) were not different from that in stenting for asymptomatic stenosis. Overall radiological event rate (55.6%) in symptomatic stenosis was also higher than that in asymptomatic stenosis (35.5%; OR, 2.274 [95% CI, 1.553-3.352]; p21 : 54.8%; OR, 2.203 [95% CI, 1.342-3.641]; p=0.002). CONCLUSIONThis study showed that as stenting was delayed, the periprocedural risk for clinical events decreased. The clinical event risk was high only in stenting within 7 days and comparable with that for asymptomatic stenosis in stenting after 7 days from index event, although the radiological event risk was not affected by stenting timing. Therefore, our results suggest that delayed stenting after 7 days from sympt
ISSN:2005-3711
1598-7876
DOI:10.3340/jkns.2020.0113