Deans' stroke musings: Comparison of robotic-assisted carotid stenting and manual carotid stenting through the transradial approach

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Sunday, September 6, 2020

Comparison of robotic-assisted carotid stenting and manual carotid stenting through the transradial approach

First you have to ask. WHY DO STENTING AT ALL? As someone from the medical profession mentioned to me once, 'Why would you consider putting inflexible metal items in flexible blood vessels?'

I still think you determine if the Circle of Willis is complete, then just close up the offending artery. I had only 3 arteries supplying my brain for 10+ years and had zero effects from that. I'm not medically trained so don't listen to me.

Comparison of robotic-assisted carotid stenting and manual carotid stenting through the transradial approach

Joshua H. Weinberg BS, Ahmad Sweid MD, Kalyan Sajja MD, M. Reid Gooch MD, Nabeel Herial MD, Stavropoula Tjoumakaris MD, Robert H. Rosenwasser MD and Pascal Jabbour MD

DOI:: https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.5.JNS201421

Online Publication Date:: 28 Aug 2020

Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD $45.00

Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of CorPath GRX robotic-assisted (RA) transradial (TR) carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared with manual TR CAS.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database and identified 13 consecutive patients who underwent TR CAS from June 2019 through February 2020. Patients were divided into 2 groups: RA (6 patients) and manual (7 patients).

RESULTS

Among 6 patients in the RA group with a mean age of 70.0 ± 7.2 years, technical success was achieved in all 6 (100%) procedures; there were no technical or access-site complications and no catheter exchanges. Transfemoral conversion was required in 1 (16.7%) case due to a tortuous aortic arch. There were no perioperative complications, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and mortality. The mean procedure duration was significantly longer in the RA group (85.0 ± 14.3 minutes [95% CI 69.9–100.0] vs 61.2 ± 17.5 minutes [95% CI 45.0–77.4], p = 0.0231). There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics, fluoroscopy time, contrast dose, radiation exposure, catheter exchanges, technical success, transfemoral conversion, technical or access-site complications, myocardial infarction, stroke, other complications, or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors’ results suggest that RA TR CAS is feasible, safe, and effective. Neurovascular-specific engineering and software modifications are needed prior to complete remote control. Remote control has important implications regarding patient access to lifesaving procedures for conditions such as stroke and aneurysm rupture as well as operative precision. Future clinical investigations among larger cohorts are needed to demonstrate reliable performance and patient benefit.