Vol 82, No 9 (2024)
Clinical vignette
Published online: 2024-07-09

open access

Page views 241
Article views/downloads 187
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Combined treatment with Shockwave and ultra-high-pressure balloon for severely calcified common carotid artery in-stent restenosis

Attilio Leone1, Angelo Cioppa2, Luigi Salemme2, Grigore Popusoi2, Armando Pucciarelli2, Michele Franzese2, Giuseppe Di Gioia2, Marco Ferrone2, Francesco Spione2, Sebastiano Verdoliva2, Nicola Verde1, Raffaele Moscato1, Giovanni Esposito1, Tullio Tesorio2
Pubmed: 38988241
Pol Heart J 2024;82(9):901-902.

Abstract

Not available

CLINICAL VIGNETTE

Combined treatment with Shockwave and ultra-high-pressure balloon for severely calcified common carotid artery in-stent restenosis

Attilio Leone1Angelo Cioppa2Luigi Salemme2Grigore Popusoi2Armando Pucciarelli2Michele Franzese2Giuseppe Di Gioia2Marco Ferrone2Francesco Spione2Sebastiano Verdoliva2Nicola Verde1Raffaele Moscato1Giovanni Esposito1Tullio Tesorio2
1Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy
2Interventional Cardiology Service, Montevergine Clinic, Mercogliano, Italy

Correspondence to:

Angelo Cioppa, MD,

Interventional Cardiology Service,

Montevergine Clinic,

Mercogliano, Italy,

phone: 0825 705 220,

e-mail: cioppa68@gmail.com

Copyright by the Author(s), 2024

DOI: 10.33963/v.phj.101398

Received: August 27, 2024

Accepted: July 1, 2024

Early publication date: July 9, 2024

An 80-year-old woman with multi-site atherosclerosis, including a history of left common/internal artery endarterectomy (2005) and stenting for post-endarterctomy restenosis (2013; self-expanding stent, Xact [Abbott

Vascular] 108 × 40 mm with optimal result) underwent control angiography as routine Duplex Doppler indicated progressive re-restenosis (320/170 cm/s, peak systolic/end-diastolic velocity). A 5F right femoral approach was used for initial vascular access. Angiography showed severely calcified restenosis of the left common carotid artery, with restenotic material appearing both inside and outside the stent (Figure 1AB, Supplementary material, Video S1). A

Figure 1. A. Baseline angiography. B. Previously implanted stent. C. Dog-bone effect with non-compliant balloon. D. Intravascular lithotripsy with Shockwave. E. Further lesion preparation with ultra-high- pressure balloon F. Final result

Destination 6F 90 cm (Terumo Europe NV) sheath was then placed, and the lesion was crossed with Emboshield NAV™ 6 (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, US) positioned distally as an embolic protection system. Despite several high-pressure dilatations with 5.0 × 12 mm and 5.0 × 20 mm non-compliant balloons, the dog-bone effect was observed, and the lesion appeared unchanged (Figure 1C; Supplementary material, Video S2). Therefore, a Pilot 50 (Abbot) guidewire was advanced alongside the Emboshield to facilitate crossing of the lesion with a 7.0 × 60 mm Shockwave M5 IVL peripheral catheter (Shockwave Medical, Inc.) (Figure 1D; Supplementary material, Video S3). Thus, three cycles of 30 impulses each were delivered achieving partial luminal gain, without adverse effects (Supplementary material, Video S4). A decision to implant a new stent was made, due to plaque prolapse in the previously implanted stent and an expected suboptimal result with balloon angioplasty. However, stent advancement through the lesion failed, and further dilation was performed with an ultra-high pressure OPN NC balloon 4.5 × 15 mm at 35 atmospheres (atm) (Figure 1E; Supplementary material, Video S5). Next, a 7.0 × 37 mm balloon-expandable stent ICover (IVascular) was advanced and deployed at 14 atm with a satisfactory final angiographic result (Figure 1F; Supplementary material, Video S6). The patient was discharged the day after, and the hospital stay was uneventful. Carotid artery in-stent restenosis is frequent, ranging from 2.7% to 33% in previous reports. However, the treatment of this condition remains a matter of debate and entails particular risks [1, 2]. To date, various mechanisms have been considered to be responsible for in-stent restenosis, primarily neointimal hyperplasia and the progression of atherosclerosis (that may involve progressive calcification(s)), necessitating diverse therapeutic approaches. In light of this, the role of intravascular imaging seems to be of paramount importance [3]. The absence of intravascular imaging assessment represented a limitation in our insight into the mechanism of progressive re-restenosis in this patient. Among the predictors of in-stent restenosis, residual stenosis after stenting has been identified as an independent risk factor [4]. To reduce residual stenosis, we opted to complete the procedure by placing another stent. Although results with different platforms, including single-layer carotid stents and zotarolimus-eluting stents, have shown promise in treating severely calcified carotid in-stent restenosis, we deemed it important to use a stent with significant radial force [5]. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of the combined use of intravascular lithotripsy and an ultra-high-pressure balloon to enable and optimize endovascular management of carotid artery highly calcific in-stent restenosis. The use of this technique allowed the achievement of successful carotid revascularization.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material is available at https://journals.viamedica.pl/polish_heart_journal.

Article information

Conflict of interest: None declared.

Funding: Dr. Leone, Dr. Spione and Dr. Verde are supported by a research grant from the CardioPaTh PhD Program.

Open access: This article is available in open access under Creative Common Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, which allows downloading and sharing articles with others as long as they credit the authors and the publisher, but without permission to change them in any way or use them commercially. For commercial use, please contact the journal office at polishheartjournal@ptkardio.pl

REFERENCES

  1. Stilo F, Montelione N, Calandrelli R, et al. The management of carotid restenosis: a comprehensive review. Ann Transl Med. 2020; 8(19): 1272, doi: 10.21037/atm-20-963, indexed in Pubmed: 33178804.
  2. Bekelis K, Moses Z, Missios S, et al. Indications for treatment of recurrent carotid stenosis. Br J Surg. 2013; 100(4): 440447, doi: 10.1002/bjs.9027, indexed in Pubmed: 23288608.
  3. Tekieli L, Mazurek A, Pieniazek P, et al. Symptomatic atherosclerotic plaque progression in a first-generation carotid stent: management and 5-year clinical and imaging outcome-a case report. Eur Heart J Case Rep. 2022; 6(1): ytab489, doi: 10.1093/ehjcr/ytab489, indexed in Pubmed: 35174303.
  4. Daou B, Chalouhi N, Starke RM, et al. Predictors of restenosis after carotid artery stenting in 241 cases. J Neurointerv Surg. 2016; 8(7): 677679, doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-011783, indexed in Pubmed: 26338829.
  5. Mazurek A, Partyka L, Trystula M, et al. Highly-calcific carotid lesions endovascular management in symptomatic and increased-stroke-risk asymptomatic patients using the CGuard™ dual-layer carotid stent system: Analysis from the PARADIGM study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 94(1): 149156, doi: 10.1002/ccd.28219, indexed in Pubmed: 30945420.