06.05.2015 Views

Prof Chia Boon Lock receives the SMA Honorary ... - nuhcs

Prof Chia Boon Lock receives the SMA Honorary ... - nuhcs

Prof Chia Boon Lock receives the SMA Honorary ... - nuhcs

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Carotid Artery Stenting<br />

Dr Teo Swee Guan, Cardiac Dept @ NUH<br />

Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting have become<br />

an established <strong>the</strong>rapeutic modality for coronary and peripheral<br />

arterial diseases, complementing surgical treatment. The<br />

application of this technique in carotid artery stenosis is an<br />

expected progression. The perceived advantages of carotid artery<br />

stenting (CAS) compared to carotid endarterectomy (CEA)<br />

include avoidance of general anes<strong>the</strong>sia and open surgical incision,<br />

shorter procedural time and hospitalization, and increased<br />

patients’ acceptance.<br />

Since FDA approval of CAS in 2004, it has been increasingly<br />

used for patients considered as high risk for surgery. In contrast to<br />

most endovascular peripheral arterial interventions, CAS<br />

represents a more challenging procedure because it requires <strong>the</strong><br />

use of smaller guidewire system (0.014-in vs 0.035-in guidewire<br />

system as in peripheral intervention), distal embolic protection<br />

device and rapid exchange system (vs. over-<strong>the</strong>-wire system). The<br />

use of long guiding sheath via common femoral artery to perform<br />

balloon angioplasty and stenting also represents new challenge for<br />

physicians with less CAS experience.<br />

CEA has long been <strong>the</strong> gold standard for <strong>the</strong> treatment of<br />

carotid artery stenosis. In North American Symptomatic Carotid<br />

Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET), symptomatic patients with<br />

carotid artery stenosis (70-99%) in CEA arm compared to medical<br />

group had higher perioperative stroke/death (5.8% vs 3.3%) but<br />

significantly lower major/fatal ipsilateral stroke at 2 years (2.5%<br />

vs 13.1%, p

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!