Carotid Intervention : Stent or Surgery? A Prospective Audit : Cardiovascular Topic

This study represents a prospective audit comparing carotid artery stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA); performed by a single surgical team. Between January 2005 and December 2008; 440 patients were referred; 177 had CAS and 263 CEA. Selection of procedure was individualised and contra-indications for CAS included internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis 85-90; intraluminal thrombus; ICA tortuosity; gross surface ulceration of plaque and excessive calcification. Type III aortic arch and arch calcification also precluded CAS. Standard techniques were used for both procedures with a protection device routinely used for CAS. Most CEAs were performed under general anaesthesia; with selective intraluminal shunting. One hundred and eighty-six patients were selected for CAS; nine (48) were converted to CEA for technical reasons. The operative risk profile was similar; but significantly more in the CAS group were hypertensive. Almost half (49) in the CAS group were asymptomatic vs 26in the CEA group. All asymptomatics had 70+stenosis on Duplex Doppler. Results were reported within one month of the procedure. The stroke rate was 2.3for CAS vs 1.9for CEA (p 0.05). Stroke and death plus one M1 was 4.5after CAS vs 3.4after CEA (p 0.05). Disabling stroke occurred in 1.1of CAS patients vs 0.4of CEA patients. These results are satisfactory and compare favourably with other similar series

Infant Feeding Tube as Urinary Tract Stent

Background: The infant feeding tube is a cheap and readily available device with many uses in the urinary tract. Many types of stents are available in the market but among other factors; cost and affordability limit their use in developing countries and remote areas. Aim: To document experience with infant feeding tubes as stents in the urinary tract. Methods: Data from the hospital records of patients who required stents at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital; Port Harcourt; Nigeria were obtained from their case notes from May 2003 to May 2006. Information extracted from these case notes included: age and sex of patient; indications for stenting; stent-related complications and outcome of surgery. The data were analysed using Microsoft Excel Software. Results: Thirty-three patients who required stents within the period were included in the study. In nineteen patients (57.6) feeding tubes were used as urethral stents while in 14 (42.4) as ureteric stents. Operations requiring stents include: dismembered pyeloplasty 9.1 (3); ureteric re-implantation 24.3 (8); ureterolithotomy 9.1 (3); and urethroplasty 57.6 (19). The stents were left in situ for 2-3 weeks depending on the indication. Ureteric stents were left for 3 weeks while urethral stents were usually left for 2 weeks. However; where a significant complication was noted; the stent was removed. Complications noted in 4 patients (12.1) which were probably stent-related include: bladder spasm; infection and wound dehiscence. Conclusion: Infant feeding tubes can be used as suitable urinary tract stents where expensive stents are not available

Infant feeding tube as urinary tract stent

Background: The infant feeding tube is a cheap and readily available device with many uses in the urinary tract. Many types of stents are available in the market but among other factors; cost and affordability limit their use in developing countries and remote areas.Aim: To document experience with infant feeding tubes as stents in the urinary tract.Methods: Data from the hospital records of patients who required stents at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital; Port Harcourt; Nigeria were obtained from their case notes from May 2003 to May 2006. Information extracted from these case notes included: age and sex of patient; indications for stenting; stent-related complications and outcome of surgery. The data were analysed using Microsoft Excel Software.Results: Thirty-three patients who required stents within the period were included in the study. In nineteen patients (57.6) feeding tubes were used as urethral stents while in 14 (42.4) as ureteric stents. Operations requiring stents include: dismembered pyeloplasty 9.1(3); ureteric re-implantation 24.3(8); ureterolithotomy 9.1(3); and urethroplasty 57.6(19). The stents were left in situ for 2-3 weeks depending on the indication. Ureteric stents were left for 3 weeks while urethral stents were usually left for 2 weeks. However; where a significant complication was noted; the stent was removed. Complications noted in 4 patients (12.1) which were probably stent-related include: bladder spasm; infection and wound dehiscence. Conclusion: Infant feeding tubes can be used as suitable urinary tract stents where expensive stents are not available