Arterial Duplex Surveillance of Implanted Nitinol Stents in the Femoropopliteal Segment for Relief of Lower Extremity Ischemia
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Purpose To evaluate the role of duplex scanning as an imaging tool in surveillance of the natural history of femoropopliteal arterial segments treated with self-expandable nitinol stents. Methods From March 1999 to December 2001, 92 limbs in 84 patients were treated with self-expanding stents in the femoropopliteal (FP) segment for the relief of chronic limb ischemia. Follow-up studies included color duplex ultrasonography (CDU) and ankle/brachial indices (ABIs) in 57 limbs. Duplex criteria used to determine the presence of a significant in-stent stenosis was an increase in the peak systolic velocity within the stent of >100% from the proximal segment. The presence of a hemodynamically significant stenosis was then correlated with the concurrent ABI. Results Eleven in-stent stenoses were documented in 11 limbs. In those patients, the mean decrease in ABI was 0.29, ranging from 0.13 to 0.50. In 46 patients with a <50% stenosis identified on CDU, the mean change in ABI was by comparison not significant. Conclusions From these data, the degree of in-stent stenosis (>50%) by duplex ultrasonographic criteria correlates well with a significant stenosis within a stented segment of the femoropopliteal artery. It seems that CDU is an ideal noninvasive imaging tool to objectively surveillance stent patency.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Arterial Duplex Surveillance of Implanted Nitinol Stents in the Femoropopliteal Segment for Relief of Lower Extremity Ischemia
- Date Crossref
- 01/06/2003
- Éditeur
- SAGE Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.