This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Gutierrez, G. R. Articles by Bruss, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Gutierrez, G. R. Articles by Bruss, J. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Prevalence of Subclavian Artery Stenosis in Patients with Peripheral Vascular Disease

Peter Mahrer

Vicken Aharonian

Prakash Mansukhani

Jeffrey Bruss

Internal mammary arteries (IMA) as conduits in coronary artery bypass grafting are superior to saphenous vein grafts. If there is subclavian artery stenosis (SAS) proximal to the IMA graft, impairment of flow to the IMA may occur. If the stenosis is severe, retrograde flow from the grafted coronary artery to the brachial artery may lead to angina. Following the identification of 2 cases of angina secondary to subclavian artery stenosis at their institution, the authors prospectively performed arch angiography in a cohort of patients with manifestations of periph eral vascular disease undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography to assess the prevalence of subclavian stenosis. Fifty-two patients were enrolled in the protocol, with 48 patients having technically acceptable studies. Of these 48, 41.6% had measurable stenosis of at least one of the brachiocephalic arteries, with 35% of patients with at least a 30% stenosis of the left subclavian artery and 18.7% with more than 50% stenosis.

They conclude that patients with significant peripheral vascular disease undergoing coronary angiography who are potential candidates for revascularization may benefit from arch angiography as part of their initial evaluation.

Angiology, Vol. 52, No. 3, 189-194 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/000331970105200305


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?