Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization?
Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) may offer acceptable short-term results in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis. Independent on the type of revascularization, the long-term benefit may be limited by recurrent stenosis, especi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | ISRN vascular medicine 2013-02, Vol.2013, p.1-5 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 5 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | ISRN vascular medicine |
container_volume | 2013 |
creator | de Witte, C. J. van Lammeren, G. W. Moll, F. L. de Borst, G. J. |
description | Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) may offer acceptable short-term results in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis. Independent on the type of revascularization, the long-term benefit may be limited by recurrent stenosis, especially after endovascular treatment. Pathophysiological studies suggest that atherosclerotic plaque composition is an independent predictor of restenosis. Identification of certain plaque characteristics could help risk stratify patients in order to decide on the best therapy and minimize the risk of restenosis. Although currently no gold standard exists for the approach of recurrent carotid stenosis, both redo CEA and CAS seem safe therapeutic options. Limited data are available on treatment of recurrent carotid in-stent stenosis. More data are required in order to recommend the best therapy for in-stent restenosis. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1155/2013/593461 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>crossref_hinda</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1155_2013_593461</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1155_2013_593461</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1081-a81eec1ce0c353212b52f1c8da45e210b6cf2511799b8a70af0c0c09cbc673873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EElXpxB_wDAr12XXsTKiUQpGKkPiYI8c5q0ZpUtkGVH49qcLAxN1wNzzvOzyEnAO7ApByyhmIqSzELIcjMuKsYJnUAo7__KdkEuM760dLUEqMyONth5E-Y0zYdtFH-pJ809CV2e4w0LRBeoMtOp9o5-jChC75ms5DwrDvU58m2o_GBP9tku_a6zNy4kwTcfJ7x-Ttbvm6WGXrp_uHxXydWWAaMqMB0YJFZoUUHHgluQOrazOTyIFVuXVcAqiiqLRRzDhm-y1sZXMltBJjcjn02tDFGNCVu-C3JuxLYOVBRnmQUQ4yevpioDe-rc2X_xf-AZGMXbg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization?</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>de Witte, C. J. ; van Lammeren, G. W. ; Moll, F. L. ; de Borst, G. J.</creator><contributor>Wu, C.-C. ; Csaszar, A.</contributor><creatorcontrib>de Witte, C. J. ; van Lammeren, G. W. ; Moll, F. L. ; de Borst, G. J. ; Wu, C.-C. ; Csaszar, A.</creatorcontrib><description>Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) may offer acceptable short-term results in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis. Independent on the type of revascularization, the long-term benefit may be limited by recurrent stenosis, especially after endovascular treatment. Pathophysiological studies suggest that atherosclerotic plaque composition is an independent predictor of restenosis. Identification of certain plaque characteristics could help risk stratify patients in order to decide on the best therapy and minimize the risk of restenosis. Although currently no gold standard exists for the approach of recurrent carotid stenosis, both redo CEA and CAS seem safe therapeutic options. Limited data are available on treatment of recurrent carotid in-stent stenosis. More data are required in order to recommend the best therapy for in-stent restenosis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2090-5831</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2090-5831</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1155/2013/593461</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</publisher><ispartof>ISRN vascular medicine, 2013-02, Vol.2013, p.1-5</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2013 C. J. de Witte et al.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1081-a81eec1ce0c353212b52f1c8da45e210b6cf2511799b8a70af0c0c09cbc673873</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1609-0568</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><contributor>Wu, C.-C.</contributor><contributor>Csaszar, A.</contributor><creatorcontrib>de Witte, C. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Lammeren, G. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moll, F. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Borst, G. J.</creatorcontrib><title>Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization?</title><title>ISRN vascular medicine</title><description>Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) may offer acceptable short-term results in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis. Independent on the type of revascularization, the long-term benefit may be limited by recurrent stenosis, especially after endovascular treatment. Pathophysiological studies suggest that atherosclerotic plaque composition is an independent predictor of restenosis. Identification of certain plaque characteristics could help risk stratify patients in order to decide on the best therapy and minimize the risk of restenosis. Although currently no gold standard exists for the approach of recurrent carotid stenosis, both redo CEA and CAS seem safe therapeutic options. Limited data are available on treatment of recurrent carotid in-stent stenosis. More data are required in order to recommend the best therapy for in-stent restenosis.</description><issn>2090-5831</issn><issn>2090-5831</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RHX</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhi0EElXpxB_wDAr12XXsTKiUQpGKkPiYI8c5q0ZpUtkGVH49qcLAxN1wNzzvOzyEnAO7ApByyhmIqSzELIcjMuKsYJnUAo7__KdkEuM760dLUEqMyONth5E-Y0zYdtFH-pJ809CV2e4w0LRBeoMtOp9o5-jChC75ms5DwrDvU58m2o_GBP9tku_a6zNy4kwTcfJ7x-Ttbvm6WGXrp_uHxXydWWAaMqMB0YJFZoUUHHgluQOrazOTyIFVuXVcAqiiqLRRzDhm-y1sZXMltBJjcjn02tDFGNCVu-C3JuxLYOVBRnmQUQ4yevpioDe-rc2X_xf-AZGMXbg</recordid><startdate>20130212</startdate><enddate>20130212</enddate><creator>de Witte, C. J.</creator><creator>van Lammeren, G. W.</creator><creator>Moll, F. L.</creator><creator>de Borst, G. J.</creator><general>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</general><scope>RHU</scope><scope>RHW</scope><scope>RHX</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1609-0568</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20130212</creationdate><title>Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization?</title><author>de Witte, C. J. ; van Lammeren, G. W. ; Moll, F. L. ; de Borst, G. J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1081-a81eec1ce0c353212b52f1c8da45e210b6cf2511799b8a70af0c0c09cbc673873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>de Witte, C. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Lammeren, G. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moll, F. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Borst, G. J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Hindawi Publishing Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Open Access</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>ISRN vascular medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>de Witte, C. J.</au><au>van Lammeren, G. W.</au><au>Moll, F. L.</au><au>de Borst, G. J.</au><au>Wu, C.-C.</au><au>Csaszar, A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization?</atitle><jtitle>ISRN vascular medicine</jtitle><date>2013-02-12</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>2013</volume><spage>1</spage><epage>5</epage><pages>1-5</pages><issn>2090-5831</issn><eissn>2090-5831</eissn><abstract>Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) may offer acceptable short-term results in symptomatic or asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis. Independent on the type of revascularization, the long-term benefit may be limited by recurrent stenosis, especially after endovascular treatment. Pathophysiological studies suggest that atherosclerotic plaque composition is an independent predictor of restenosis. Identification of certain plaque characteristics could help risk stratify patients in order to decide on the best therapy and minimize the risk of restenosis. Although currently no gold standard exists for the approach of recurrent carotid stenosis, both redo CEA and CAS seem safe therapeutic options. Limited data are available on treatment of recurrent carotid in-stent stenosis. More data are required in order to recommend the best therapy for in-stent restenosis.</abstract><pub>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</pub><doi>10.1155/2013/593461</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1609-0568</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2090-5831 |
ispartof | ISRN vascular medicine, 2013-02, Vol.2013, p.1-5 |
issn | 2090-5831 2090-5831 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1155_2013_593461 |
source | Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
title | Does Restenosis Still Hamper the Benefit of Carotid Artery Revascularization? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T02%3A08%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref_hinda&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20Restenosis%20Still%20Hamper%20the%20Benefit%20of%20Carotid%20Artery%20Revascularization?&rft.jtitle=ISRN%20vascular%20medicine&rft.au=de%20Witte,%20C.%20J.&rft.date=2013-02-12&rft.volume=2013&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=5&rft.pages=1-5&rft.issn=2090-5831&rft.eissn=2090-5831&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155/2013/593461&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref_hinda%3E10_1155_2013_593461%3C/crossref_hinda%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |