Advertisement

Peripheral Interventions

  • Farris K. Timimi
Chapter

Abstract

Claudication, from the Latin claudicato, meaning limping, is recognized as reproducible and predictable ambulatory pain that is relieved with rest. There are several useful noninvasive tools for classifying the severity of claudication, including ankle/brachial indices (ABI) measured at rest or with exercise provocation and Doppler ultrasonography [1], Clinical tools used to quantify the symptomatic severity of disease include the classification system developed by Fontaine (Fig. 14–1) [3]. Physiologic testing often consists of transcutaneous oxygen pressures and laser Doppler skin perfusion pressures, tools that can help predict the likelihood of healing of a chronic ulcer [4,5]. These parameters allow for more precise description and classification of patients into specific risk groups, ranging from chronic claudication to limb-threatening ischemia (Figs. 14–2 to 14–4).

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ballinger A: Funktionelle Angiologie. Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme. 1979:57–84.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pentecost M, Criqui M, Dorros G, et al.: Guidelines for peripheral percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the abdominal aorta and lower extremity vessels. Circulation 1994, 89:511–531.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hiatt W, Hirsch A, Regensteiner J, Brass E: Clinical trails for claudication. Assessment of exercise performance, functional status, and clinical end points. Vascular Clinicial Trialists. Circulation 1995, 92:614–621.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bacharach J, Rooke T, Osmundson P, Gloviczki P: Predictive value of transcutaneous oxygen pressure and amputation success by use of supine and elevation measurements. J Vasc Surg 1992, 15(3)558–563.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Adera H, James K, Castronuovo J Jr, et al.: Prediction of amputation wound healing with skin perfusion pressure. Journal of Vasc Surg 1995, 21(5):823–828.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hiatt WR: Medical treatment of peripheral arterial disease and claudication. N Engl J Med 2001, 344(21):1608–1621.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Criqui M, Fronek A, Barrett-Connor E, et al.: The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease in a defined population. Circulation 1985, 71:510–515.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dormandy J, Mahir M, Ascady G, et al.: Fate of the patient with chronic leg ischaemia: a review article. J Cardiovasc Surg 1989, 30:50–57.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kannel W, McGee D: Update on some epidemiologic features of intermittent claudication: the Framingham Study. J Am Geratric Soc 1985, 33:13–18.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Widmer L, Greensher A, Kannel W: Occlusion of peripheral arteries: a study of 6400 working subjects. Circulation 1964, 30:836–842.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Imparato A, Kim G, Davidson T, Crowley J: Intermittent claudication: its natural course. Surgery 1975, 78:795–799.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vogt M, McKenna M, Wolfson S, Kuller L: The relationship between ankle brachial index, other atherosclerotic diseases, diabetes, smoking and mortality in older men and women. Atherosclerosis 1993, 101:191–202.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fowl R, Gewirtz R, Love M, Kempczinski R: Natural history of claudicants with critical hemodynamic indices. Ann Vasc Surg 1992, 6(l):31–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McDaniel M, Cronenwett J: Basic data related to the natural history of intermittent claudication. Ann Vasc Surg 1989, 3:273–277.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cronenwett J, Warner K, Zelenock G, et al.: Intermittent claudication: current results of nonoperative management. Arch Surg 1984, 119:430–436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spence L, Hartneil G, Reinking G, et al.: Diabetic versus nondiabetic limb-threatening ischemia: outcome of percutaneous iliac intervention. AJR 1999, 172(5):1335–1341.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Couch N: On the arterial consequences of smoking. J Vasc Surg 1986, 3:807–812.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Criqui MH, Fronek A, Barrett-Connor E, et al.: The prevalence of peripheral arterial disease in a defined population. Circulation 1985, 71(3):510–515.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bachman D, Casarella W, Sos T: Percutaneous iliofemoral angioplasty via the contralateral femoral artery. Radiology 1979, 130:617–621.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scheinert D, Schroder M, Balzer J, et al.: Stent-supported reconstruction of the aortoiliac bifurcation with the kissing balloon technique. Circulation 1999, 100(19 Suppl I):II295-II300.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    de Vries S, Hunink MG: Results of aortic bifurcation grafts for aortoiliac occlusive disease: a meta-analysis. J Vasc Surg 1997, 26:558–569.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Murphy T, Khwaja A, Webb M: Aortoiliac stent placement in patients treated for intermittent claudication. J Vasc Interven Radiol 1998, 9(3):421–428.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sullivan T, Childs M, Bacharach J, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and primary stenting of the iliac artery in 288 patients. J Vasc Surg 1997, 25(5):829–838.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cambria R, Faust G, Gusberg R, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Correlates of clinical success. Arch Surg 1987, 122:283–287.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Colapinto R, Stronell R, Johnston W: Transluminal angioplasty of complete iliac obstructions. AJR 1986, 146:859–862.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Henry M, Amor M, Ethevenot G, et al.: Percutaneous endoluminal treatment of iliac occlusions: long-term follow-up of 105 patients. J Endovasc Surg 1998, 5(2):228–235.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Johnston K: Iliac arteries: reanalysis of results of balloon angioplasty. Radiology 1993, 186:207–212.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morag B, Rubinstein Z, Kessler A, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the distal abdominal aorta and its bifurcation. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 1987, 10:129–133.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gallino A, Mahler F, Probst P, Nachbur B: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the arteries of the lower limbs: a 5-year follow-up. Circulation 1984, 70:619–623.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Henry M, Amor M, Ethevenot G, et al.: Palmaz stent placement in iliac and femoropopliteal arteries: primary and secondary patency rates in 310 patients with 2–4 year follow-up. Radiology 1995, 197(1): 167–174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bosch J, Hunink M: Meta-analysis of the results of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stent placement for aortoiliac occlusive disease. Radiology 1997, 204(l):87–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bosch J, Tetteroo E, Mali W, Hunink M: Iliac artery occlusive disease: cost-effectiveness analysis of stent placement versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Dutch Iliac Stent Trial Study Group. Radiology 1998, 208(3):641–649.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tetteroo E, van Engelen A, Spithoven J, et al.: Stent placement after iliac artery angioplasty: comparison of hemodynamic and angiographic criteria. Dutch Iliac Stent Trial Group. Radiology 1996, 201(1):155–159.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tetteroo E, van der Graaf Y, Bosch J, et al.: Randomised comparison of primary stent placement versus primary angioplasty followed by selective stent placement in patients with iliac-artery occlusive disease. Dutch Iliac Stent Trial Study Group. Lancet 1998, 351(9110):1159–1159.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Damaraju S, Cuasay L, Le D, et al.: Predicators of primary patency failure in Wallstent self-expanding endovascular prostheses for iliofemoral occlusive disease. Tex Heart Inst J 1997, 24(3):173–178.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Barth K, Virmani R, Froelich J, et al.: Paired comparison of vascular wall reactions to the Palmaz stents, Strecker tantalum stents, and Wallstents in canine iliac and femoral arteries. Circulation 1996, 93(12):2161–2169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sapoval M, Chatellier G, Long A, et al.: Self-expandable stents for the treatment of iliac artery obstructive disease: long term success and prognostic factors. AJR 1995, 166:1173–1179.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zeitler E, Beyer-Enke S, Rompel O: Indications and results after Strecker-stent application in iliac and SFA. International Angiology 1993, 12(2):152–161.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Brewster D: Clinical and anatomic considerations for surgery in aortoiliac disease and results of surgical treatment. Circulation 1991, 83(Suppl I):I-42–I-52.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Martin EC: Transcatheter therapies in peripheral and noncoronary vascular disease: introduction. Circulation 1991, 83(Suppl I):I-1–I-5.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Adar R, Critchfield G, Eddy D: A confidence profile analysis of the results of femoropopliteal percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in the treatment of lower extremity ischemia. J Vasc Surg 1989, 9:1–9.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Murray R, Hewes R, White R, et al.: Long-segment femoropopliteal stenoses: is angioplasty a boon or a bust? Radiology 1987, 162:473–476.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    O’Donohoe M, Sultan S, Colgan M, et al.: Outcome of the first 100 femoropopliteal angioplasties performed in the operating theater. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1999, 17(1):66–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Capek P, McLean G, Berkowitz H: Femoropopliteal angioplasty: factors influencing long-term success. Circulation 1991, 83(Suppl II):70–80.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Golledge J, Ferguson K, Ellis M, et al.: Outcome of femoral popliteal angioplasty. Ann Surg 1999, 229(1):146–153.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gordon I, Conroy R, Arefi M, et al.: Three-year outcome of endovascular treatment of superficial femoral artery occlusion. Arch Surg 2001, 136(2):221–228.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hunink M, Wong J, Donaldson M, et al.: Revascularization for femoropopliteal disease: a decision and cost-effectiveness analysis. JAMA 1995, 274:165–171.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Johnston K: Femoral and popliteal arteries: reanalysis of results of balloon angioplasty. Radiology 1992, 183:767–771.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Johnston K, Rae M, Hogg-Johnston S, et al.: Five-year results of a prospective study of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Ann Surg 1987, 206:403–413.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Conte M, Belkin M, Donaldson M, et al.: Femorotibial bypass for claudication: Do results justify an aggressive approach? J Vasc Surg 1995, 21:873–880.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Donaldson M, Mannick J: Femoropopliteal bypass grafting for intermittent claudication: Is pessimism warranted? Arch Surg 1980, 115:724–727.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Taylor L, Porter J: Clinical and anatomic considerations for surgery in femoropopliteal disease and the results of surgery. Circulation 1991, 23(suppl I):I-63–I-69.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Cejna M, Thurnher S, Illiasch H, et al.: PTA versus Palmaz stent placement in femoropopliteal artery obstructions: a multicenter prospective randomized study. J Vasc Interven Radiol 2001, 12(1):23–31.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Gray B, Olin J: Limitations of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with stenting for femoropopliteal disease. Semin Vasc Surg 1997, 10(1):8–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Rousseau HP, Raillat CR, Joffre FG, et al.: Treatment of femoropopliteal stenoses by means of self-expandable endoprosthesis: midterm results. Radiology 1989, 172:961–964.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Strecker E, Boos I, Gottmann D: Femoropopliteal artery stent placement: evaluation of long term success. Radiology 1997, 205(2):375–383.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rutherford R: Acute limb ischemia: Clinical assessment and standards for reporting. Semin Vasc Surg 1992, 5:4.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rutherford R, Flanigan D, Gupta S, et al.: Suggested standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia. J Vasc Surg 1986, 4:80–94.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Rutherford R, Baker J, Ernst C, et al.: Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia: revised version. J Vasc Surg 1997, 26(3):517–538.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Suggested standards for reports dealing with lower extremity ischemia. Prepared by the Ad Hoc Committee on Reporting Standards, Society for Vascular Surgery/North American Chapter, International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg 1986, 4:80–94.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ouriel K, Shortell C, DeWeese J, et al.: A comparison of thrombolytic therapy with operative revascularization in the initial treatment of acute peripheral arterial ischemia. J Vasc Surg 1994, 19:1021–1030.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ouriel K, Veith F, Sasahara A: Thrombolysis or peripheral arterial surgery (TOPAS): Phase I results. J Vasc Surg 1996, 23:64.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    The STILE Investigators. Results of a prospective randomized trial evaluating surgery versus thrombolysis for ischemia of the lower extremity: The STILE trial. Ann Surg 1994, 220:251–266.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Weaver F, Comerota A, Youngblood M, et al.: Surgical revascularization versus thrombolysis for nonembolic lower extremity native artery occlusions: Results of a prospective randomized trial. J Vasc Surg 1996, 24:513–521.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ouriel K, Veth F, Sasahara A: A comparison of recombinant urokinase with vascular surgery as initial treatment for acute arterial occlusion of the legs. N Engl J Med 1998, 338:1105–1111.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Saab M, Smith D, Aka P, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of tibial arteries for limb salvage. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 1992, 15:211–216.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Schwarten D: Clinical and anatomical considerations for nonoperative therapy in tibial disease and the results of angioplasty. Circulation 1991, 83(suppl I):I-86–I-90.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dorros G, Jaff M, Murphy K: The acute outcome of tibioperoneal vessel angioplasty in 417 cases with claudication and critical limb ischemia. Cath & Cardio Diag 1998, 45(3):251–256.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Bakal C, Sprayregen S, Scheinbaum K, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the infrapopliteal arteries: results in 53 patients. AJR 1990, 154:171–174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Brown K, Moore E, Getrajdman G, Saddekni S: Infrapopliteal angioplasty: long term follow-up. J Vasc Interven Radiol 1993, 4:139–144.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schwarten D, Cutcliff W: Arterial occlusive disease below the knee: treatment with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty performed with low profile catheters and steerable guidewires. Radiology 1988, 169(l):71–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kesteloot H, Houte O: Reversed circulation through the vertebral artery. Acta Cardiol 1963, 18:285–299.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Staikov I, Do D, Remonda L, et al.: The site of atheromatosis in the subclavian and vertebral arteries and its implication for angioplasty. Neuroradiology 1999, 41(7):537–542.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Borstein N, Norris J: Subclavian steal: A harmless hemodynamic phenomenon. Lancet 1986, 2:303–305.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hadjipertrou P, Cox S, Piemonte T, Eisenhauer A: Percutaneous revascularization of atherosclerotic obstruction of aortic arch vessels. JACC 1999, 33(5):1238–1245.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Martinez R, Rodriguez-Lopez J, Torruella L, et al.: Stenting for occlusion of the subclavian arteries. Technical aspects and follow-up results. Tex Heart Inst J 1997, 24(l):23–27.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Selby J, Matsumoto A, Tegtmeyer C, et al.: Balloon angioplasty above the aortic arch: immediate and long-term results. AJR 1993, 160(3):631–635.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Nguyen H, Reeves F, Therasse E, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in coronary-internal thoracic-subclavian steal syndrome. Can J Cardiol 1997, 3:285–289.Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Motarjeme A: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of supra-aortic vessels. J Endovasc Surg 1996, 3:171–181.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Salam T, Lumsden A, Smith R: Subclavian artery revascularization: a decade of experience with extrathoracic bypass procedures. J Surg Research 1994, 5:387–392.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Lewin A, Blaufox MD, Castle H, et al.: Apparent prevalence of curable hypertension in Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program. Arch Intern Med 1985, 145:424–427.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Davis B, Crook J, Vestal R, Oates J: Prevalence of renovascular hypertension in patients with grade III or IV hypertensive retinopathy. N Engl J Med 1979, 301:1273–1276.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ying C, Tifft C, Gavras H, Chobanian A: Renal revascularization in the azotemic hypertensive patient resistant to therapy. N Engl J Med 1984, 311:1070–1075.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Mann S, Pickering T: Detection of renovascular hypertension. State of the art. Ann Intern Med 1992, 117:845–853.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Krijnen P, van Jaarsveld B, Steyerberg E, et al.: A clinical prediction rule for renal artery stenosis. Ann Intern Med 1998, 129:705–711.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Turnbull J: Is listening for abdominal bruits useful in the evaluation of hypertension? JAMA 1995, 274:1299–1301.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Scoble J, Hamilton G: Atherosclerotic renovascular disease. Remediable cause for renal failure in the elderly. BMJ 1990, 300:1670–1671.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Olin J, Piedmonte M, Young J, et al.: The utility of duplex ultrasound scanning of the renal arteries for diagnosing significant renal artery stenosis. Ann Intern Med 1995, 122:833–838.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Ghantous V, Eisen T, Sherman A, Finkelstein F: Evaluating patients with renal failure for renal artery stenosis with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography. Am J Kidney Dis 1999, 33:36–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    van Jaarsveld B, Krijnen P, Derkx F, et al.: The place of renal scintigraphy in the diagnosis of renal artery stenosis. Fifteen years of clinical experience. Arch Intern Med 1997, 157(11):1226–1234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Olbricht C, Paul K, Prokop M, et al.: Minimally invasive diagnosis of renal artery stenosis by spiral computed tomography angiography. Kidney Int 1995, 48:1332–1337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Safian R, Textor S: Renal artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2001, 344(6):431–442.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Derkx F, Schalekamp M: Renal artery stenosis and hypertension. Lancet 1994, 344:237–239.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Kadir S: Kidneys. In Normal and Variant Angiographic Anatomy. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1991:387–429.Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Olin J, Melia M, Young J, Graor R: Prevalence of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis in patients with atherosclerosis elsewhere. Am J Med 1990, 88:46N-51N.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Harrison E, Hunt J, Bernatz P: Morphology of fibromuscular dysplasia of the renal artery in renovascular hypertension. Am J Med 1967, 43(1):97–112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Rimmer J, Gennari F: Atherosclerotic renovascular disease and progressive renal failure. Ann Intern Med 1993, 118:712–719.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Appel R, Bleyer A, Reavis S, Hansen K: Renovascular disease in older patients beginning renal replacement therapy. Kidney Int 1995, 48:171–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Mailoux L, Napolitano B, Bellucci A, et al.: Renal vascular disease causing end-stage renal disease. Incidence, clinical correlates, and outcomes: A 20-year clinical experience. Ma J Kidney Dis 1994, 24:622–629.Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Greco B, Breyer J: Atherosclerotic ischemic renal disease. Am J Kidney Dis 1997, 29:167–187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Pohl M, Novick A: Natural history of atherosclerotic and fibrous renal artery disease: clinical implications. Am J Kidney Dis 1985, 5:A120-A130.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Schreiber M, Pohl M, Novick A: The natural history of atherosclerotic and fibrous renal artery disease. Urol Clin North Am 1984, 11(3):383–392.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Preston R, Epstein M: Ischemic renal disease: an emerging cause of chronic renal failure and end-stage renal disease. J Hypertens 1997, 15(12 Pt 1):1365–1377.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Ram C, Clagett G, Radford L: Renovascular hypertension. Semin Nephrol 1995, 15:152–174.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Connolly J, Higgins R, Walters H, et al.: Presentation, clinical features and outcome in different patterns of atherosclerotic renovascular disease. Q J Med 1994, 86:413–421.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Sos TA, Pickering T, Sniderman K, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty in renovascular hypertension due to atheroma or fibromuscular dysplasia. N Engl J Med 1983, 309(5):274–279.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Millan V, McCauley J, Kopelman R, Madias N: Percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty in nonatherosclerotic renovascular hypertension. Hypertension 1985, 7(5):668–674.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Kidney D, Deutsch L: The indications and results of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting in renal artery stenosis. Seminar Vasc Surg 1996, 9:188–197.Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Tegtmeyer C, Elson J, Glass T, et al.: Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty: the treatment of choice for renovascular hypertension due to fibromuscular dysplasia. Radiology 1982, 143(3):631–637.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Sos T, Picerking T, Saddekni S, et al.: The current role of renal angioplasty in the treatment of renovascular hypertension. Urol Clin North Am 1984, 11(3)503–513.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ramsey L, Waller P: Blood pressure response to percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for renovascular hypertension: an overview of published series. Br Med J 1990, 300:569–572.Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Bonnelli F, McKusick M, Textor S, et al.: Renal artery angioplasty: technical results and clinical outcome in 320 patients. Mayo Clin Proc 1995, 70(11):1041–1052.Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Kremer Hovinga T, de Jong P, de Zeeuw D, et al.: Restenosis prevalence and long-term effects on renal function after percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty. Nephron 1986, 44(Suppl 1):64–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Webster J, Marshall F, Abdalla M, et al.: Randomised comparison of percutaneous angioplasty vs continued medical therapy for hypertensive patients with atheromatous renal artery stenosis. Scottish and Newcastle Renal Artery Stenosis Collaborative Group. J Hum Hyperten 1998, 12(5):329–335.Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Martin L, Casarella W, Alspaugh J, Chuang V: Renal artery angioplasty: increased technical success and decreased complications in the second 100 patients. Radiology 1986, 159(3):631–634.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Plouin P, Chatellier G, Darne B, Raynaud A: Blood pressure outcome of angioplasty in atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis: a randomized trial. Essai Multicentrique Medicaments vs Angioplastie (EMMA) Study Group. Hypertension 1998, 31 (3):823–829.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    van Jaarsveld B, Krijnen P, Pieterman H, et al.: The effect of balloon angioplasty on hypertension in atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2000, 342(14):1007–1014.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Blum U, Krumme B, Flugel P, et al.: Treatment of ostial renal-artery stenoses with vascular endoprostheses after unsuccessful balloon angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1997, 36(7):459–465.Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Dorros G, Jaff M, Jain A, et al.: Follow-up of primary Palmaz-Schatz stent placement for atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis. AJC 1995, 75(15):1051–1055.Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Hennequin L, Joffre F, Rousseau H, et al.: Renal artery stent placement: immediate and midterm technical and clinical results with the Wallstent endoprosthesis. Radiology 1994, 191:713–719.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Iannone L, Underwood P, Nath A, et al.: Effect of primary balloon expandable renal artery stents on long-term patency, renal function, and blood pressure in hypertensive and renal insufficient patients with renal artery stenosis. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1996, 37(3):243–250.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    White C, Ramee S, Collins T, et al.: Renal artery stent placement: utility in lesions difficult to treat with balloon angioplasty. JACC 1997, 30(6):1445–1450.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Paulsen D, Klow N, Rogstad B, et al.: Preservation of renal function by percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in ischemic renal disease. Nephr, Dialy, Trans 1999, 14(6):1454–1461.Google Scholar
  124. 124.
    Burket M, Cooper K, Kennedy D, et al.: Renal artery angioplasty and stent placement: predictors of favorable outcome. Am Heart J 2000, 139:64–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Harden P, MacLeod M, Rodger R, et al.: Effect of renal-artery stenting on progression of renovascular failure Lancet 1997, 349:1133–1136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Rundback J, Gray R, Rozenblit G, et al.: Renal artery stent placement for the management of ischemic nephropathy. Journal of Vasc & Interven Rad 1998, 9(3):413–420.Google Scholar
  127. 127.
    LoGerfo F, Nowak M, Quist W: Structural details of boundary layer separation in a model human carotid bifurcation under steady and pulsatile flow conditions. J Vasc Surg 1985, 2(2):263–269.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. Methods, patient characteristics, and progress. Stroke 1991, 22:711–720.Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    European Carotid Surgery Trialists Group: European Carotid Surgery Trialists Collaborative Group. MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial: Interim results for symptomatic patients with severe (70%-90%) or with mild (0%-29%) carotid stenosis. Lancet 1991, 337:1235–1243.Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. N Engl J Med 1991, 325:445–453.Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Mayberg M, Wilson S, Yatsu F, et al.: Carotid endarterectomy and prevention of cerebral ischemia in symptomatic carotid stenosis. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program 309 Trialists Group. JAMA 1991, 266:3289–3294.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. JAMA 1995, 273:1421–1428.Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Biller J, Feinberg WM, Castaldo JE, et al.: Guidelines for carotid endarterectomy: a statement for healthcare professionals from a Special Writing Group of the Stroke Council, American Heart Association. Circulation 1998, 97(5)501–509.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Moore W, Vescera C, Robertso J, et al.: Selection process for participating surgeons in the asymptomatic carotid atherosclerosis study. Stroke 1991, 22:1353–1357.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Naylor, A, London N, Bell P: Carotid endarterectomy versus carotid angioplasty. Lancet 1997, 349:203–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Jordan W, Voellinger D, Doblar D, et al.: Microemboli detected by transcranial Doppler monitoring in patients during carotid angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy. Cardiovasc Surg 1999, 7(1):33–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    White C, Gomez C, Iyer S, et al.: Carotid stent placement for extracranial carotid artery disease: current state of the art. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000, 51:339–346.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Wholey M, Wholey M, Mathias K, et al.: Global experience in cervical carotid artery stent placement. Cath and Cardio Interven 2000, 50(2): 160–167.Google Scholar
  139. 139.
    Roubin GS, New G, Iyer SS, et al.: Immediate and late clinical outcomes of carotid artery stenting in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis: a 5-year prospective analysis. Circulation 2001, 103:532–537.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Alberts M, for the publication committee of the WALLSTENT. Results of a multicenter prospective randomized trial of carotid artery stenting vs carotid endarterectomy. Stroke 2001, 32:325.Google Scholar
  141. 141.
    Endovascular versus surgical treatment in patients with carotid stenosis in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): a randomized trial. Lancet 2001, 357:1729–1737.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Farris K. Timimi

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations