| Title |
Flow-diverter Stents for Internal Carotid Artery Reconstruction Following Spontaneous Dissection: A Technical Report
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Neuroradiology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00062-018-0707-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher Alan Hilditch, Waleed Brinjikji, Joanna Schaafsma, Chun On Anderson Tsang, Patrick Nicholson, Ronit Agid, Timo Krings, Vitor M Pereira |
| Abstract |
Extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) dissection is an important cause of ischemic stroke in younger adults. The optimal medical and surgical strategies for managing these lesions have not been well established. We report a case series of extracranial ICA reconstruction using overlapping flow-diverter stents as a rescue therapy for the treatment of symptomatic ICA dissection in patients presenting with recurrent ischemic stroke and/or severe hemispheric hypoperfusion who failed medical management. Consecutive patients undergoing endovascular reconstruction of either occluded or severely narrowed ICA due to dissection and presenting with symptoms of recurrent cerebral ischemia or cerebral hypoperfusion were included. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, antiplatelet management, clinical presentation, imaging findings, treatment characteristics, complications and stroke recurrence rates. A total of 7 patients were included. The mean age was 47 years, 4 patients were male and 3 were female. All patients were symptomatic presenting with ipsilateral recurrent ischemia with or without cerebral hemodynamic compromise and necessitated reconstructive treatment. Patients were placed on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and either ticagrelor or clopidogrel prior to the procedure. In cases where patients were not preloaded with dual antiplatelets intravenous abciximab was used as a bridging therapy. Post-stenting angioplasty was performed if deemed necessary. There were no symptomatic ischemic or hemorrhagic complications. No patients had recurrent ischemic events. Reconstruction of the ICA as a rescue strategy for extracranial carotid dissection using flow-diverter stents is feasible and was performed without adverse events in this small series. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 36 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 12 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 22% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 20 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 August 2018.
All research outputs
#13,687,586
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Neuroradiology
#136
of 313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,240
of 331,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Neuroradiology
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 313 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.