Carotid artery stenosis (CS) is a major medical problem affecting approximately 10% of the general population 80 years or older and causes stroke in approximately 10% of all ischemic events. In patients with symptomatic, moderate-to-severe CS, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), has been used to lower the risk of stroke. In primary CS, CEA was found to be superior to best medical therapy (BMT) according to 3 large randomized controlled trials (RCT). Following CEA and CAS, restenosis remains an unsolved problem involving a large number of patients as the current treatment recommendations are not as clear as those for primary stenosis. Several studies have evaluated the risk of restenosis, reporting an incidence ranging from 5% to 22% after CEA and an in-stent restenosis (ISR) rate ranging from 2.7% to 33%. Treatment and optimal management of this disease process, however, is a matter of ongoing debate, and, given the dearth of level 1evidence for the management of these conditions, the relevant guidelines lack clarity. Moreover, the incidence rates of stroke and complications in patients with carotid stenosis are derived from studies that did not use contemporary techniques and materials. Rapidly changing guidelines, updated techniques, and materials, and modern medical treatments make actual incidence rates barely comparable to previous ones. For these reasons, RCTs are critical for determining whether these patients should be treated with more aggressive treatments additional to BMT and identifying those patients indicated for surgical or endovascular treatments. This review summarizes the current evidence and controversies concerning the risks, causes, current treatment options, and prognoses in patients with restenosis after CEA or CAS.
Purpose: To evaluate the midterm outcomes of chimney and/or periscope grafts (CPGs) in patients presenting type I endoleak after a previous endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Methods: Between June 2002 and April 2014, 24 consecutive patients (mean age 73.9±9.2 years; 23 men) presenting a type I endoleak were addressed with CPGs to extend the proximal and/or distal landing zone and to maintain side branch perfusion. Indication for treatment was a type Ia endoleak in 23 (96%) patients and a type Ib endoleak in one. Median interval from the previous EVAR to endoleak treatment with CPGs was 52.2±48.9 months (range 0.2–179). All patients had proximal/distal landing zones precluding any standard endovascular reintervention. Measured outcomes included technical success and perioperative mortality and morbidity. Technical success was defined as a procedure completed as intended, with no secondary procedures within 30 days. Midterm outcomes included survival, CPG patency, endoleaks, and freedom from reintervention. Results: Technical success was 96%; a single patient required an additional procedure to seal a recurrent type Ia endoleak. Intraoperative revascularization of all 55 target vessels (2.3/patient) with CPGs was successful. One (4%) patient died within 30 days. Estimated survival at 12, 24, and 36 months was 83%; estimated CPG patency at the same intervals was 94%. Over a mean follow-up of 23.4±29 months, 6 (25%) reinterventions were performed; of these, 4 were secondary to type I endoleak. Aneurysm diameters reduced from 88.3±26 to 85.5±33 mm (p=0.49) over the mean follow-up. Conclusion: The CPG technique is a safe and effective tool for treatment of type I endoleak after previous EVAR. The CPG technique is feasible even in nonelective patients, with excellent outcomes in terms of patency. Close imaging follow-up is warranted to rule out recurrent or de novo endoleaks.
Atherosclerosis-related coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide. This requires effective primary and secondary prevention in reducing the complications related to CAD; the regression or stabilization of the pathology remains the mainstay of treatment. Statins have proved to be the most effective treatment in reducing adverse effects, but there are limitations related to the administration and achievement of effective doses as well as side effects due to the lack of target-related molecular specificity. The implemented technological steps are polymers and nanoparticles for the administration of statins, as it has been seen how the conjugation of drug delivery systems (DDSs) with statins increases bioavailability by circumventing the hepatic–renal filter and increases the related target specificity, enhancing their action and decreasing side effects. Reduction of endothelial dysfunction, reduced intimal hyperplasia, reduced ischemia–reperfusion injury, cardiac regeneration, positive remodeling in the extracellular matrix, reduced neointimal growth, and increased reendothelialization are all drug-related effects of statins enhanced by binding with DDSs. Recent preclinical studies demonstrate how the effect of statins stimulates the differentiation of endogenous cardiac stem cells. Poly-lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) seems to be the most promising DDS as it succeeds more than the others in enhancing the effect of the bound drug. This review intends to summarize the current evidence on polymers and nanoparticles for statin delivery in the field of cardiovascular disease, trying to shed light on this topic and identify new avenues for future studies.