PURPOSE: To assess differing mechanisms of thrombolysis determining time to reperfusion, completeness of thrombus dissolution, and embolic potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An in vitro perfusion model designed to mimic arterial flow conditions was created. Bifurcated limbs allowed continuous flow through one channel and the placement of radiolabeled (iodine-125) thrombus housed in a 5-cm segment of polytetrafluoroethylene graft in the other. The three experimental groups consisted of a standard continuous urokinase infusion, a pulsed pressurized injection of saline, and a similar injection with urokinase. A continuous infusion of 5% dextrose served as a control group. Time to reflow (as assessed with ultrasonic flow monitoring), completeness of thrombus dissolution (I-125 liberated into solution), and the number and size of embolic particles produced (detected by a series of graduated filter sizes) were analyzed. RESULTS: Time to reflow was significantly faster for both groups when pressurized injections were used (P < .001). There was no reflow in the control arm at 90 minutes. Completeness of thrombus dissolution was higher when a continuous infusion of urokinase was used in comparison to either of the power injection groups or the control (P < .05). The amount of embolic debris produced was significantly lower with a continuous infusion of urokinase compared with either of the power lysis groups (P < .05), but significantly greater than the control arm (P < .001). The size of the embolic particles in the power pulsed lysis groups was significantly decreased by the addition of urokinase (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Reflow is more rapidly established by the use of mechanical means. However, a less complete dissolution of thrombus in conjunction with a greater amount of embolic debris is achieved with this approach. The size of the embolic particles produced is reduced by the addition of a thrombolytic agent.
PURPOSE: To assess differing mechanisms of thrombolysis determining time to reperfusion, completeness of thrombus dissolution, and embolic potential. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An in vitro perfusion model designed to mimic arterial flow conditions was created. Bifurcated limbs allowed continuous flow through one channel and the placement of radiolabeled (iodine-125) thrombus housed in a 5-cm segment of polytetrafluoroethylene graft in the other. The three experimental groups consisted of a standard continuous urokinase infusion, a pulsed pressurized injection of saline, and a similar injection with urokinase. A continuous infusion of 5% dextrose served as a control group. Time to reflow (as assessed with ultrasonic flow monitoring), completeness of thrombus dissolution (I-125 liberated into solution), and the number and size of embolic particles produced (detected by a series of graduated filter sizes) were analyzed. RESULTS: Time to reflow was significantly faster for both groups when pressurized injections were used (P < .001). There was no reflow in the control arm at 90 minutes. Completeness of thrombus dissolution was higher when a continuous infusion of urokinase was used in comparison to either of the power injection groups or the control (P < .05). The amount of embolic debris produced was significantly lower with a continuous infusion of urokinase compared with either of the power lysis groups (P < .05), but significantly greater than the control arm (P < .001). The size of the embolic particles in the power pulsed lysis groups was significantly decreased by the addition of urokinase (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Reflow is more rapidly established by the use of mechanical means. However, a less complete dissolution of thrombus in conjunction with a greater amount of embolic debris is achieved with this approach. The size of the embolic particles produced is reduced by the addition of a thrombolytic agent.
Authors: J Gralla; M Burkhardt; G Schroth; M El-Koussy; M Reinert; K Nedeltchev; J Slotboom; C Brekenfeld Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: P Mordasini; M Hiller; C Brekenfeld; G Schroth; U Fischer; J Slotboom; M Arnold; J Gralla Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-12-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Helmi L Lutsep; Wayne M Clark; Gary M Nesbit; Todd A Kuether; Stan L Barnwell Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Florian C Roessler; Marcus Ohlrich; Jan H Marxsen; Marc Schmieger; Peter-Karl Weber; Florian Stellmacher; Peter Trillenberg; Jürgen Eggers; Günter Seidel Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Golnaz Ahadi; Christian S Welch; Michele J Grimm; David J Fisher; Eyal Zadicario; Karin Ernström; Arne H Voie; Thilo Hölscher Journal: J Ther Ultrasound Date: 2013-11-01