Inflammation and In-Stent Restenosis: The Role of Serum Markers and Stent Characteristics in Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND: Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) may currently be recommended especially in younger patients with a high-grade carotid artery stenosis. However, evidence is accumulating that in-stent restenosis (ISR) could be an important factor endangering the long-term efficacy of CAS. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of inflammatory serum markers and procedure-related factors on ISR as diagnosed with duplex sonography. METHODS: We analyzed 210 CAS procedures in 194 patients which were done at a single university hospital between May 2003 and June 2010. Periprocedural C-reactive protein (CRP) and leukocyte count as well as stent design and geometry, and other periprocedural factors were analyzed with respect to the occurrence of an ISR as diagnosed with serial carotid duplex ultrasound investigations during clinical long-term follow-up. RESULTS: Over a median of 33.4 months follow-up (IQR: 14.9-53.7) of 210 procedures (mean age of 67.9±9.7 years, 71.9% male, 71.0% symptomatic) an ISR of ≥70% was detected in 5.7% after a median of 8.6 months (IQR: 3.4-17.3). After multiple regression analysis, leukocyte count after CAS-intervention (odds ratio (OR): 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02-1.69; p = 0.036), as well as stent length and width were associated with the development of an ISR during follow-up (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.05-1.65, p = 0.022 and OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.09-0.84, p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of ISR during long-term follow-up after CAS occur within the first year. ISR is associated with periinterventional inflammation markers and influenced by certain stent characteristics such as stent length and width. Our findings support the assumption that stent geometry leading to vessel injury as well as periprocedural inflammation during CAS plays a pivotal role in the development of carotid artery ISR

Positional brain deformation visualized with magnetic resonance morphometry

© 2010 by the Congress of Neurological Surgeons

The historical discovery of macular edema

The occurrence of macular edema, or of intraretinal fluid in general, was largely unknown prior to the invention of the ophthalmoscope. One of the first reports on 'Retinitis in Glycosuria', a disease complex, which today would partly be described as diabetic maculopathy, was published in 1856 by Jaeger. His observations were confirmed less than twenty years later by Nettleship in London, and in 1875 Appolinaire Bouchardat from Paris described fluid and lipid accumulation in the macula which led--in his words--to a glucose induced amblyopia. The first pathophysiological hypotheses of fluid accumulation in the posterior pole were then put forward in 1882 by Tartuferi, who thought the edema represented swelling of photoreceptor sheaths. In 1896, the Frenchman Nuel coined the term 'oedeme maculaire' which he had observed in a retinitis pigmentosa patient. However, it was not until the end of the first World War, that the Swiss ophthalmologist Alfred Vogt observed macular edema in a variety of other ocular conditions such as iridocyclitiOFF macular edema to a macular hole. A quarter of a century later Bangerter coined the German term 'Zystoides Makulaodem', and in 1950, Hruby was the first to draw attention to the development of macular edema after cataract extraction. Three years later this was followed by Irvine's classical paper on cystoid macular edema after intra- and extracapsular cataract extraction which had been complicated by incarceration of the vitreous in the anterior segment with consecutive tugging on the macula. A decade later, the phenomenon of cystic fluid accumulation in the macula after cataract extraction was further characterised by Gass and Norton using fluorescein angiography. The ensuing years saw the emergence of new concepts regarding the blood-retinal barrier and the paramount role of its dysfunction in the development of macular edema