1 / 16

STENT TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL ATHEROSCLEROSIS - Update of the INTRASTENT registry -

STENT TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL ATHEROSCLEROSIS - Update of the INTRASTENT registry -. W. Kurre Klinik für Neuroradiologie - Alfried Krupp Krankenhaus Essen J. Berkefeld Institut für Neuroradiologie - Goethe Universität Frankfurt FOR THE INTRASTENT STUDY GROUP 07.10.2010. COINVESTIGATORS.

matsu
Download Presentation

STENT TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL ATHEROSCLEROSIS - Update of the INTRASTENT registry -

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. STENT TREATMENT OF INTRACRANIAL ATHEROSCLEROSIS - Update of the INTRASTENT registry - W. Kurre Klinik für Neuroradiologie - Alfried Krupp Krankenhaus Essen J. Berkefeld Institut für Neuroradiologie - Goethe Universität Frankfurt FOR THE INTRASTENT STUDY GROUP 07.10.2010

  2. COINVESTIGATORS Universitätsklinik Kiel O. Jansen / M. Tietke AK Altona Hamburg B. Eckert Universitätsklinik Hamburg O. Wittkugel / J. Fiehler University of Oxford W. Küker Universitätsklinik Göttingen M. Knauth / S. Pilgram / R. Schramm Universitätsklinik Düsseldorf B. Turowski Wedau Kliniken Duisburg F. Brassel / S. Schotes / D. Meila Helios Klinikum Erfurt J. Klisch / V. Sychra Universitätsklinik Dresden R. v. Kummer / D. Mucha Universitätsklinik Frankfurt J. Berkefeld / W. Kurre/ S. Kamek Universitätsklinik Mainz W. Müller-Forell München Rechts der Isar Th. Liebig / F. Dorn Military Hosptial Prague J. Maskova / H. Parobkova Landesnervenklinik Wagner-Jauregg Linz J. Trenkler / H. Haring Universitätsklinik Graz G. Klein / K. Niederkorn Papanikolaou General Hospital Greece V. Katsaridis

  3. INCLUSION CRITERIA

  4. LOCATION OF STENOSIS

  5. TECHNICAL SUCCESS OVERALL SUCCESS: 89.7%

  6. MORBIDITY / MORTALITY % as per procedure

  7. HEMORRHAGE Significantlymorehemorrhagesfor M1 stenosescompared to otherlocations!

  8. ISCHAEMIA Moreperforatorstrokes in posteriorcirculation

  9. OTHER

  10. LOCATION OF STENOSIS Differences NOT statisticallysignificant

  11. DEVICES USED Significantlymore SE in dICA and M1 Moreprospectivedatafor SE

  12. COMPLICATIONS - DEVICE • datanotrandomized • significantlymore SE in dICA and M1 • - moreprospectivedatafor SE • p = 0.054 fordisabelingstroke and death

  13. COMPLICATIONS - DEVICE • datanotrandomized • - moreprospectivedatafor SE • p = 0.23 and 0.2 forintra- and extradural BE vs. SE

  14. CLINICAL FOLLOW UP FU rate 68.5% median FU 312 Tage

  15. ANGIOGRAFIC FOLLOW UP 22.6% control angiography selected patients!

  16. SUMMARY • disabeling stroke and death 6.4% • TIA and nondisabeling stroke 4.9% • Increasing complication rates in intradural locations (n.s.) • significantly more hemorrhages in treatment of M1 stenoses • complication rates for SES higher for intra- and extradural locations (n.s., bias!) • ipsilateral stroke rate FU 3% • (CAVE: 68.5% follow up, median 312 days) • rate of restenosis 32.1% • (CAVE: 22.6% follow up)

More Related