Robot-Assisted Carotid Artery Stenting: A Safety and Feasibility Study.
CAS
Carotid artery stent
Endovascular robotics
Robot
Journal
Cardiovascular and interventional radiology
ISSN: 1432-086X
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003538
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
received:
08
09
2020
accepted:
23
12
2020
pubmed:
16
1
2021
medline:
29
6
2021
entrez:
15
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Endovascular robotics is an emerging technology within the developing field of medical robotics. This was a prospective evaluation to assess safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted carotid artery stenting. Consecutive cases of carotid artery stenting cases performed over period of 24 months, from May 2015 to October 2016, using the Magellan Robotic System (Hansen, Mountain View, CA) were included. All cases utilised the robotic system to navigate the arch, obtain a stable position in the common carotid artery, followed by manual manipulation of Embolic Protection Devices and self-expandable stents through the robotic catheter. Patients demographics, clinical indications, anatomical features, technical and clinical success, complication rate and hospital stay were prospectively recorded. Thirteen patients, 10 males (78.5%), with an average age of 68.7 years were treated. Mean follow up time was 30 months. Ten patients (91%) were symptomatic at presentation. Anatomical indications for endovascular stent insertion were previous open surgery to the neck ± radiotherapy (87.5%) and hostile anatomy for open surgery (12.5%). Technical success was 100% and the robotic system demonstrates enhanced stability during arch and lesion crossing. There were no neurological complications post-operatively. Average hospital stay was 3 days (range 2-6 days) and a change in serum creatinine of -7.8 μmol/L. There was no documented case of in stent restenosis, new or worsening neurology during follow-up. These results illustrate safety and feasibility of robotic endovascular revascularisation for carotid disease and demonstrates potential to enhance peri-procedural safety through improved control and stability.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33447924
doi: 10.1007/s00270-020-02759-0
pii: 10.1007/s00270-020-02759-0
pmc: PMC8060210
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
795-800Références
Brott TG, Howard G, Roubin GS, et al. Long-term results of stenting versus endarterectomy for carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(11):1021–31.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1505215
Heo SH, Bushnell CD. Factors influencing decision making for carotid endarterectomy versus stenting in the very elderly. Neurology. 2017.
Willaert WI, Cheshire NJ, Aggarwal R, et al. European virtual reality endovascular research team (EVERest): improving results for carotid artery stenting by validation of the anatomic scoring system for carotid artery stenting with patient-specific simulated rehearsal. J Vasc Surg. 2012;56:1763–70.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.03.257
Bonati LH, Ederle J, Dobson J, Engelter S, Featherstone RL, Gaines PA, BeardJD, Venables GS, Markus HS, Clifton A, Sandercock P, Brown MM; CAVATAS Investigators. Length of carotid stenosis predicts peri-procedural stroke or death and restenosis in patients randomized to endovascular treatment or endarterectomy. Int J Stroke. 2014;9(3):297–305.
Riga CV, Bicknell CD, Hamady MS, Cheshire NJ. Evaluation of robotic endovascular catheters for arch vessel cannulation. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54(3):799–809.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.03.218
Riga CV, Bicknell CD, Hamady M, Cheshire N. Tortuous iliac systems: a significant burden to conventional cannulation in the visceral segment; is there a role for robotic catheter technology? J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2012;23(10):1369–75.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2012.07.006
Riga CV, Rolls A, Rippel R, Shah C, Hamady M, Bicknell C, Cheshire N. Advantages and limitations of robotic endovacular catheters for carotid artery stenting. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino). 2012;53(6):747–53.
Perera AH, Riga CV, Monzon L, Gibbs RG, Bicknell CD, Hamady M. Robotic arch catheter placement reduces cerebral embolization during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;53(3):362–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.10.017
Rafii-Tari H, Riga CV, Payne CJ, Hamady MS, Cheshire NJ, Bicknell CD, Yang GZ. Reducing contact forces in the arch and supra-aortic vessels using the Magellan robot. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64(5):1422–32.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.06.215
Madhwal S, Rajagopal V, Bhatt DL, et al. Predictors of difficult carotid stenting as determined by aortic arch angiography. J Invasive Cardiol. 2008;20:200–4.
pubmed: 18460700
Boufi M, Guivier-Curien C, Loundou AD, Deplano V, Boiron O, Chaumoitre K, Gariboldi V, Alimi YS. Morphological analysis of healthy aortic arch. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017;53(5):663–70.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.02.023
Faggioli G, Ferri M, Gargiulo M, Freyrie A, Fratesi F, Manzoli L, Stella A. Measurement and impact of proximal and distal tortuosity in carotid stenting procedures. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46(6):1119–24.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.08.027
Feezor RJ, Martin TD, Hess PJ, Klodell CT, Beaver TM, Huber TS. Risk factors for perioperative stroke during thoracic endovascular aortic repairs (TEVAR). J Endovasc Ther. 2007;14:568–73.
doi: 10.1177/152660280701400420
Katz ES, Tunick PA, Rusinek H, Ribakove G, Spencer FC, Kronzon I. Protruding aortic atheromas predict stroke in elderly patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass: experience with intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;20:70–7.
doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(92)90139-E