While uncommon, stent migration is potentially more dangerous when the stent is placed in the venous system (as with CCSVI treatment), than in the arterial system. In the venous system, blood is moving toward the heart, and the diameter of the vessels generally widen toward the heart. As a result, a freely migrating stent, particularly one initially placed in a location that has a relatively direct path toward the heart (e.g. the jugular veins), may actually travel down and into the outer chambers of the heart. Such a migration could result in the need for emergency procedures to remove or re-place the stent.
At present, the risk of stent migration cannot be quantified, as there is no study aggregating the number of venous stents placed and the number of stent migrations.
In this instance, a massage caused a stent to migrate after 3 years.
CureIous wrote:No one can tell you much of anything. Aint nothing but guessing. I'm a few weeks shy of having 4 of them for four years and lose no sleep over it. They endothelialized, every scan has shown them all snugged up where they're supposed to be surrounded by a layer of skin. Stopped worrying about it after about the second year. I guess we are the scientific study.
Also I contacted Euromedic expressing my concerns and they sent this reply.
Your stents are: Wallstent 16x60mm and Wallstent 16x20mm - both in left jugular vein. The material of the stent stays for lifetime. Nothing should happen with it in mechanical way.
Another issue is possibility of thrombosis or hyperplasia, therefore you need to remember about doppler check-ups at least every 6 months.
Shortening and Migration of Wallstents after Stenting of Central Venous Stenoses in Hemodialysis Patients
Purpose: To report our results for the placement of central venous stents in patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methods: Ten Wallstents (Schneider, Bülach, Switzerland) were placed in 10 patients with shunt thrombosis, shunt dysfunction or arm swelling associated with central vein stenosis or occlusion. Technical success, patency and complications were evaluated. Results: Stent deployment was successful in all cases. In seven cases (70%) there was significant delayed stent shortening. In two of these cases there was also stent migration. All these cases required additional stents. Primary patency rates at 6, 12 and 24 months were 66%, 25% and 0. Twenty-three additional procedures (percutaneous transluminal angioplasty or stenting) were required to achieve secondary patency rates at 6, 12 and 24 months of 100%, 75% and 57%. Conclusion: Stent placement in the central veins of dialysis patients has a high technical success rate resulting in symptomatic relief and preservation of access. Repeat interventions are required to maintain patency. Significant delayed shortening of the Wallstent occurred in 70% of patients which may have affected the patency rates. Strategies are suggested to avoid this problem.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users