Safety and efficacy of different stent types for the endovascular therapy of extracranial vertebral artery disease

Objectives: This study aims to determine safety and efficacy of different stent types for extracranial vertebral artery stenting (EVAS) at a single-center institution. Background: Although endovascular revascularization techniques are well established for a variety of arterial vessel territories, its role within the vertebrobasilar system is less well defined. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all EVAS procedures performed at our institution between 1997 and 2012. Results: A total of 35 EVAS procedures were attempted in 35 patients with symptomatic occlusive extracranial vertebral artery (EVA) disease. Carotid self-expanding bare-metal stents (BMS-SE; n = 18), coronary balloon-expandable bare-metal stents (BMS-BE; n = 7) or drug-eluting stents (DES-BE; n = 16) were used according to physician's choice. The overall technical and clinical success rate was 100 and 94 %, respectively. Periprocedural complications included one death 14 days after intervention due to complications of initial stroke and 3 (9 %) patients with access site complications. Follow-up after a median of 18 ± 21 months yielded an overall in-stent restenosis rate of 23 % and a recurring clinical symptoms rate of 20 % whereas both endpoints were closely associated as 83 % of patients with recurring symptoms showed significant restenosis. Concerning the stent type, BMS-SE were associated with a significant higher in-stent restenosis rate compared to balloon-expandable stents (p = 0.012), and although not statistically significant, there was a clear trend towards a lower in-stent restenosis rate in drug-eluting compared to bare-metal stents (p = 0.068). Conclusions: In patients with symptomatic extracranial vertebral artery disease, stenting is a safe and effective treatment option whereas balloon-expandable stents, and particularly drug-eluting stents, are superior to self-expanding stents.