4.3 Article

Long-Term Follow-Up of Endovascular Repair in the Management of Arterial Stenosis Caused by Takayasu's Arteritis

Journal

ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 42, Issue -, Pages 93-100

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.10.066

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: This retrospective study evaluated the long-term results of endovascular repair in the management of arterial stenosis caused by Takayasu's arteritis (TA). Methods: Sixty-seven endovascular procedures (percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty or stenting) were performed for 49 arterial lesions in 35 patients. Endovascular treatment was performed when the disease was inactive. The patients were pretreated with immunosuppressive drugs and were followed every 3-6 months to monitor disease activity and medical treatment. Doppler ultrasonography and magnetic resonance angiography were performed every 6 months. Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was used to analyze the survival of renal artery procedures because the number of lesions in other territories was not sufficient for statistical analysis. The mean follow-up duration after the endovascular procedure was 83 months (range: 12-144 months). Results: Twenty-two (33%) endovascular interventions resulted in restenosis or occlusion. Reinterventions resulted in primary assisted patency in 45 (92%) lesions with restenosis. Only 4 (8%) of the 49 arterial lesions were occluded at the time of the final evaluation. The overall patency rate for the renal artery stents was 93.7% (15/16) after 8 years of follow-up. In the Kaplan-Meier survival analyses of the renal artery lesions, the 1- and 8-year restenosis-free survival rates of renal arterial interventions were 74% and 57%, respectively, (P = 0.281). Conclusions: In this study, endovascular treatment with adequate immunosuppressive medication resulted in long-term patency with one- or multi-stage reinterventions in 92% of stenotic arterial lesions caused by TA.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available