Comparative effectiveness of commonly used devices for carotid artery stenting: an NCDR Analysis (National Cardiovascular Data Registry)

JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Feb;7(2):171-177. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.10.014. Epub 2014 Jan 15.

Abstract

Objectives: This study sought to characterize usage and outcomes of carotid stenting platforms.

Background: A variety of stents and embolic protection devices (EPDs) are used for carotid artery stenting. Little is known about current usage patterns and differences in outcomes with these devices.

Methods: We analyzed 12,135 consecutive carotid stent procedures in the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) CARE (Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy) registry performed between January 1, 2007 and March 31, 2012. We compared baseline characteristics and crude and multivariable-adjusted rates of in-hospital combined death/stroke among patients treated with Acculink/Accunet (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Illinois), Xact/Emboshield (Abbott), and Precise/Angioguard (Cordis Corporation, Bridgewater, New Jersey) stent/EPD combinations.

Results: In 78.2% of cases, stents were used in conjunction with their specific, corresponding U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved EPD. The Acculink/Accunet (n = 2,617, 21.6%), Xact/Emboshield (n = 3,507, 28.9%), and Precise/Angioguard (n = 2,696, 22.2%) stent/EPD combinations were used in 72.7% of all cases. The Protégé/SpiderFx (ev3 Endovascular Inc., Plymouth, Minnesota) (n = 453, 3.7%) and Wallstent/Filterwire (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) (n = 213, 1.8%) devices were used in a minority of cases. In unadjusted analyses, the Precise/Angioguard system was associated with higher rates of the primary outcome than were the Acculink/Accunet (2.5% vs. 1.8%; p = 0.058) and Xact/Emboshield (2.5% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.14) systems that were not statistically different. In adjusted analyses, differences between Precise/Angioguard and Accunet/Acculink (odds ratio [OR]: 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89 to 2.47; p = 0.065), Precise/Angioguard and Xact/Emboshield (OR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.76; p = 0.38), and Xact/Emboshield and Accunet/Acculink (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.97; p = 0.18) remained nonsignificant.

Conclusions: In modern U.S. practice, the Acculink/Accunet, Xact/Emboshield, and Precise/Angioguard carotid stenting systems are used in most cases and are associated with similarly low rates of adverse events.

Keywords: carotid artery stenosis; carotid artery stenting; embolic protection devices.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Multicenter Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Angioplasty, Balloon / adverse effects
  • Angioplasty, Balloon / instrumentation*
  • Angioplasty, Balloon / mortality
  • Carotid Stenosis / complications
  • Carotid Stenosis / diagnosis
  • Carotid Stenosis / mortality
  • Carotid Stenosis / therapy*
  • Chi-Square Distribution
  • Comparative Effectiveness Research
  • Female
  • Hospital Mortality
  • Humans
  • Logistic Models
  • Male
  • Multivariate Analysis
  • Odds Ratio
  • Prosthesis Design
  • Registries
  • Risk Assessment
  • Risk Factors
  • Stents*
  • Stroke / etiology
  • Time Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • United States