Which Offers the Best? Stent Graft or Bare Metal Stent for Endovascular Treatment of Aortoiliac Disease

Abstract

Background: In the present study, it was aimed to compare the stent grafts and bare-metal stents in terms of post-procedural patency, clinical recovery and complications in the subjects with symptomatic aorto-iliac arterial disease. Methods: A total of 79 subjects with symptomatic aorto-iliac arterial disease treated with endovascular methods were included in the present study. Forty three subjects received self-expendable bare metal stent (ev3 Protégé stent system, Endovascular Inc., Plymouth, Minnesota, USA) and 36 subjects received PTFE-covered stent graft (Fluency Plus Stent Graft, Bard Peripheral Vascular, Tempe, Arizona). The subjects were compared after and at Months 1, 6, and 12 following the procedure in terms of Rutherford's classification, ankle-arm index (AAI), patency rates, and complications. Results: The subjects receiving bare metal stent and stent graft for aorto-iliac arterial disease were followed for averagely 15 months. For the subjects receiving bare metal stent, primary patency rates at months 1, 6, and 12 were 98%, 81%, and 70%, respectively, while secondary patency rate at month 12 was found to be 84%. For the group of stent graft, primary patency rates were found as 97%, 97%, and 92%, respectively and secondary patency rate at month 12 was found to be 94%. Stent grafts were applied at the same time in 2 patients who had metal bare metal because the rupture occurred during the procedure. In the comparison between two groups, the group of stent graft was found to be statistically superior to the other in terms of patency, clinical and post-procedural complications. Conclusion: In conclusion, it was found that the stent grafts were superior to the bare metal stents in terms of patency and complication rates in the subjects with symptomatic aortoiliac disease.