Comparative effectiveness of commonly used devices for carotid artery stenting: An NCDR analysis (National Cardiovascular Data Registry)

JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 171-177

  Giri, Jay ^a   Kennedy, Kevin F ^b   Weinberg, Ido ^c   Hawkins, Beau M ^c   Press, Marcella Calfon ^d   Drachman, Douglas ^c   McCormick, Daniel J ^a   Aronow, Herbert D ^e   White, Christopher J ^f   Rosenfield, Kenneth ^c   Yeh, Robert W ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d UCLA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e ST JOSEPH MERCY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f JOHN OCHSNER HEART AND VASCULAR INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

carotid artery stenosis; carotid artery stenting; embolic protection devices

Indexed keywords

CAROTID ARTERY STENOSIS; CAROTID ARTERY STENTING; EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICES;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANGIOPLASTY, BALLOON; CAROTID STENOSIS; CHI-SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; FEMALE; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; REGISTRIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; STENTS; STROKE; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

AGED; ARTICLE; CAROTID ARTERY STENT; CAROTID ARTERY STENTING; CAROTID ENDARTERECTOMY; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; DEATH; EMBOLIC PROTECTION DEVICE; EMBOLIC PROTECTION FILTER; FEMALE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; REVASCULARIZATION;

EID: 84894334756     PISSN: 19368798     EISSN: 18767605     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.10.014     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. J. Giri, R.W. Yeh, and K.F. Kennedy et al. Unprotected carotid artery stenting in modern practice Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2013 Jun 27 [E-pub ahead of print]
2. C.J. White, H.V. Anderson, and R.G. Brindis et al. The Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy (CARE) registry: objectives, design, and implications Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 71 2008 721 725
3. B.M. Hawkins, K.F. Kennedy, and J. Giri et al. Pre-procedural risk quantification for carotid stenting using the CAS score: a report from the NCDR CARE registry J Am Coll Cardiol 60 2012 1617 1622
4. J.P. Hart, P. Peeters, J. Verbist, K. Deloose, and M. Bosiers Do device characteristics impact outcome in carotid artery stenting? J Vasc Surg 44 2006 725 730
5. M. Bosiers, G. de Donato, and K. Deloose et al. Does free cell area influence the outcome in carotid artery stenting? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 33 2007 135 141
6. M. Schillinger, M. Gschwendtner, B. Reimers, J. Trenkler, L. Stockx, and J. Mairet Does carotid stent cell design matter? Stroke 39 2008 905 909
7. C.H. Timaran, E.B. Rosero, A. Higuera, A. Ilarraza, J.G. Modrall, and G.P. Clagett Randomized clinical trial of open-cell vs closed-cell stents for carotid stenting and effects of stent design on cerebral embolization J Vasc Surg 54 2011 1310 1316
8. M. Bosiers, K. Deloose, J. Verbist, and P. Peeters The impact of embolic protection device and stent design on the outcome of CAS Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 20 2008 272 279
9. R. Zahn, T. Ischinger, B. Mark for the ALKK Investigators Embolic protection devices for carotid artery stenting: is there a difference between filter and distal occlusive devices? J Am Coll Cardiol 45 2005 1769 1774
10. V. Iyer, G. de Donato, and K. Deloose et al. The type of embolic protection does not influence the outcome in carotid artery stenting J Vasc Surg 46 2007 251 256
11. B.K. Nallamothu, H.S. Gurm, and H.H. Ting et al. Operator experience and carotid stenting outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries JAMA 306 2011 1338 1343