View clinical trials related to Stent Stenosis.
Filter by:The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to identify the effects of percutaneous interventions for branch PA stenosis on exercise capacity in patients with d-TGA, ToF and TA. The main question[s] it aims to answer are: The primary study objective is to identify the effects of percutaneous interventions for branch PA stenosis on exercise capacity in patients with d-TGA, ToF and TA. The secondary objectives are 1) to assess the effects of percutaneous interventions for branch PA stenosis on RV function and 2) to define early markers for RV function and adaptation to improve timing of these interventions. Participants will undergo the same series of examinations at baseline and approximately 6 months follow-up (within 6 week time-range) as part of standard care: conventional transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE), cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and conventional Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) including a low dose dobutamine stress MRI to assess RV functional reserve. The low dose dobutamine stress MRI will be performed in the interventional group from the UMC Utrecht/WKZ and Erasmus MC because the LUMC and AUMC do not have a suitable infrastructure for the low dose dobutamine stress MRI and this cannot be achieved throughout the duration of this study. The baseline CMR in the interventional group will be performed as close as possible prior to the intervention but maximal 4 weeks prior to the intervention. In addition, the intervention group will undergo standard RV pressure measurements during the intervention. Quality of life (QoL) questionnaires will be obtained at baseline and 2 weeks post intervention (intervention group) or a similar time range in the control group, which is based on experts opinion. TTE, CPET and conventional CMR will be performed within 2-4 years follow-up to assess the long-term effects of percutaneous PA interventions. Researchers will compare the difference in VO2 max (% predicted) between the interventional group (TGA, ToF or TA patients with a class II indication for a PA intervention who will undergo a percutaneous intervention for a PA stenosis) and the control group (TGA, ToF or TA patients with a class II indication for a PA intervention who will undergo conservative management)
Multicentric Italian registry aimed to evaluated the role and results of plastic and metal stents in the treatment of malignant distal biliary strictures
Randomised comparison of Culotte technique versus "Double Kissing" - Crush technique (DK-Crush) for the percutaneous treatment of de novo non-left main coronary bifurcation lesions with modern everolimus-eluting stents (DES) - German multicenter study
Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia (CMI) is defined by one or more arterial digestive lesions, responsible for severe mesenteric symptoms. The clinical presentation of CMI is characterized by postprandial abdominal pain and weight loss, leading to severe malnutrition. It is a frequent pathology which affects preferentially the elderly patients of female sex (70%) with cardio-vascular comorbidities. Risk factors include smoking, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Despite medical and diagnostic advances, the morbidity and mortality of CMI remain very high (>70%). Optimal management of CMI is based on early diagnosis. Symptomatic patients with CMI should be treated without much delay to relief symptoms (present in 43% patients) and prevent acute mesenteric ischemia. The three visceral arteries affected by atherosclerotic disease are coeliac trunc, inferior mesenteric artery and Superior Mesenteric Artery (SMA). The SMA is treated the most frequently, because it is the main relevant artery associated with CMI. Endovascular treatment (angioplasty and stenting) is considered as the first-line treatment for CMI when feasible. It is indicated especially in the case of high grade stenosis or occlusion of the Superior Mesenteric Artery. Two types of stents can be used for this procedure: bare metal stents (BMS) or covered stents (CS). Even if BMS are standard care there is no consensus on the type of stent to use. There are very few reported series with large numbers of patients comparing BMS and CS in this indication. However, to our knowledge, no results from a randomized study addressing this issue have ever been published. These are only retrospective with a low level of evidence (IIb). The largest series compared 147 patients with primary intervention for CMI treatment using BMS versus 42 using CS. Treatment with CS showed better results in terms of symptom recurrence (10% vs 32%, p <0.002), restenosis (12% vs 42%, p <0.0002) and re-interventions (10% vs 42%), after at least 1 year of follow-up. Indeed, endovascular treatment using BMS was associated with high incidence of symptoms recurrence despite the satisfying patency rates in both occluded and stenotic vessels. There are no international guidelines to recommend the use of one or another sort of stent. The necessity of a randomised study addressing the issue of bare metal versus covered stents deployment seems to be important. The investigators propose to demonstrate that covered stents presents a better efficacy than bare metal stents, with a multicenter randomized study involving 24 vascular surgical departments of French University Hospitals.