Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Stents in Patients With Isthmic Coarctation of the Aorta

Abstract

Endovascular stent implantation has become the treatment of choice for the management of patients with native coarctation of the aorta (CoA). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of self-expandable stenting (SES) with balloon-expandable stenting (BES) in the treatment of native CoA. In this single-center retrospective study, all patients who underwent SES or BES for the management of native CoA were enrolled. Patients were followed up for a median period of 35 (inter-quartile range 15 to 71) months. The primary outcome of interest was a composite end point consisted of death, surgical repair, re-stenting, re-ballooning, and hospital admission for hypertension crisis. The CoA diameter has changed from 3.2 ± 2.1 to 14.2 ± 4.0 mm in the BES group and from 4.6 ± 2.6 to 12.2 ± 3.7 mm in the SES group (both p <0.001). The procedure was successful with residual pressure gradient <20 mm Hg in 99.0% and 98.6% of patients in the BES and SES groups, respectively. Major adverse events occurred in 6 (8.7%) in the SES groups and 14 (20.3%) in the BES group (p = 0.053). Kaplan-Meier curve showed no difference between the 2 groups in terms of survival from major adverse events (p = 0.10), but when groups were matched for the propensity of stenting methods, SES was associated with lower major adverse events (p = 0.01). In conclusion, the SES and BES methods were safe and durable in our cohort with low rates of adverse events. After adjustment for the propensity of treatment with each stenting method, SES was associated with better outcomes. Regardless of the outcome of each method, it should be noted that the taken approach should be tailored to the patient's anatomy.