Indications and immediate and long‐term results of a novel pericardium covered stent graft: Consecutive 5 year single center experience

Secco, Gioel Gabrio; Serdoz, Roberta; Kılıç, İsmail Doğu; Caiazzo, Gianluca; Mattesini, Alessio; Parisi, Rosario; Luca, Giuseppe De; Pistis, Gianfranco; Marino, Paolo; Mario, Carlo Di

doi:10.1002/ccd.26131

Cited by 20 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Covered stents have proven to be effective devices in the acute treatment of CAP. They show high sealing rate, ranging between 91% and 100%, as was also the case in our study (95.8%). Since CSs have become available, a significant decrease in emergency cardiac surgery and in‐hospital MACE has been observed .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…We report a high rate of ISR (29.2%), without significant difference in incidence between the PTFE and pericardium CSs. A comparable high rate is reported in other studies, ranging from 31.6% up to 54,6% in PTFE CS‐treated patients, and 26.3% in a group treated with pericardium CS. This phenomenon is probably due to altered endothelialization .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is a covered stent justifiable in the treatment of coronary artery perforation? An observational analysis of long‐term results of two different covered stent types

Rosseel

Scott

Prihadi

et al. 2018

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives In this retrospective observational study, we investigate outcome of patients treated with or without covered stent (CS) implantation in the management of coronary artery perforation (CAP) during coronary intervention. Background CSs have shown to be effective devices to achieve acute hemostasis in large CAP. However, doubts have been raised regarding their long‐term outcome. Methods Data of 19 061 PCI procedures during a 10‐year period were reviewed. Fifty‐five cases of large CAP were withheld (Ellis type 2, 3 or cavity spilling). All medical and procedural records of these cases were retrospectively reviewed. Results Twenty‐four (43.6%) patients were treated with CS implantation (15 polytetrafluoroethylene and 9 pericardium CSs). Twenty‐six (47.3%) patients were managed without CS implantation, of whom five had unsuccessful delivery of a CS (stent delivery failure 17.2%). Although significantly more Ellis type‐3 perforations were present in the CS group compared to the Non‐CS group (75.0% vs 45.2%; P = 0.03), in‐hospital mortality was not significantly different (8.3% vs 6.4%; [P = 0.79]). We observed a high rate of CS restenosis (29.2%) but a lower rate of CS thrombosis (4.2%). Despite these observations, 5‐year MACE and all‐cause mortality were not significantly different between CS and Non‐CS group (respectively, 58.8% vs 50.0% (P = 0.26) and 26.7% vs 13.3% (P = 0.36)). Conclusion Although deliverability of CSs was not flawless and a high rate of CS restenosis appeared, short‐ and long‐term outcome were comparable between patients treated with or without CS. Therefore, CSs are justifiable in the treatment of CAP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Is a covered stent justifiable in the treatment of coronary artery perforation? An observational analysis of long‐term results of two different covered stent types

Rosseel

Scott

Prihadi

et al. 2018

Cathet Cardio Intervent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They also showed no significant difference in rates of in‐stent restenosis (ISR) . However, other studies have independently shown ISR rates as high as 54.6% for PTFE‐covered stents and 26.3% for PCS . Little evidence exists for its use for other indications; however, it has been reported as safe in the management of coronary vessel rupture and exclusion of coronary aneurysms .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond this, the stent has the potential for occlusion of vessel side branches, which must be taken into account by the operator . Here, we used the pericardium covered stent to allow for effective exclusion of the pseudoaneurysm while reducing the risk of complications such as in‐stent restenosis and thrombus formation, associated with the use of bare‐metal stents and PTFE‐covered stents . Given the lack of a true aneurysm wall, coil embolisation was avoided to reduce the risk of pseudoaneurysm expansion or rupture and haemorrhage .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endovascular treatment of a hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm using a novel pericardium covered stent

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Visceral and renal artery aneurysms (VRAAs) and pseudoaneurysms are rare. Their increasing incidence is largely thought to be due to advances in medical imaging. Twenty percent of VRAAs occur in hepatic arteries, with approximately fifty percent of these represented by pseudoaneurysms, which are prone to spontaneous rupture. Many treatments for VRAAs exist, with the endovascular approach being favoured. Treatment aims to preserve visceral perfusion and exclude the aneurysm; however, complex aneurysms may require parent artery or end‐organ sacrifice. Covered stents allow rapid aneurysm exclusion while preserving parent artery patency, a favourable outcome when parent artery or end‐organ sacrifice is undesirable. The AneuGraft pericardium covered stent (PCS) combines the benefits of a low‐profile covered stent with those of a low immunogenic material. We describe the endovascular treatment of a patient with a hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm, where parent artery sacrifice was considered unacceptable. The AneuGraft PCS was used to provide immediate and complete exclusion, with dual antiplatelet therapy for 1 week, followed by single antiplatelet use. The procedure was a technical success, with preservation of the hepatic arteries and complete exclusion of the pseudoaneurysm. There were no complications immediately following the procedure or on post‐procedural follow‐up. The pseudoaneurysm remained excluded at 6‐week CT angiogram (CTA) follow‐up. This case describes a safe and effective method for completely excluding a complex pseudoaneurysm, utilising the AneuGraft PCS, allowing for the potential management of a wider range of aneurysms with unfavourable morphology.

show abstract

“…In the assessment, while the use of IVUS to ensure correct stent implantation and final high-pressure balloon inflation may improve the outcome [2], the use of OCT is not well established in this acute scenario and have been only probed in the assessment of pericardium covered stents and in a case reported of aneurysm post-kawasaki disease treated with polyurethane covered stent [3,4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coronary Artery Rupture After Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation Resolved with Graft Stent: Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coronary artery perforation (CAP) is an infrequent and life-threatening complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We report a 52-year-old male admited with NSTEMI. During percutaneous coronary intervention on left anterior descending artery with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds the patient suffered a type III coronary artery perforation and pericardiocentesis and graft stent implantation was needed. To the best of our knowleadge this is the first case reported of stent graft assessment by optical coherence tomography (OCT) after coronary artery perforation with a bioabsorbable vascular scaffold (BVS). In the acute phase by OCT, the backscattering does not allow see though the graft stent, nevertheless in the follow up it does. We describe a early positive remodeling on the BVS segment.

show abstract

Indications and immediate and long‐term results of a novel pericardium covered stent graft: Consecutive 5 year single center experience

Abstract: PCSs were effective in the treatment of friable embolization-prone coronary plaques, sealing of acute iatrogenic vessel rupture and exclusion of large aneurysms with no thrombosis but high target lesion revascularization.

Cited by 20 publications

References 27 publications

Is a covered stent justifiable in the treatment of coronary artery perforation? An observational analysis of long‐term results of two different covered stent types

Is a covered stent justifiable in the treatment of coronary artery perforation? An observational analysis of long‐term results of two different covered stent types

Endovascular treatment of a hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm using a novel pericardium covered stent

Coronary Artery Rupture After Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Implantation Resolved with Graft Stent: Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About