A M Norbash1, R J Singer. 1. Department of Neuroradiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Aneurysms have been clinically and experimentally treated with various surgical and endovascular methods, including endovascular polymer instillation. Additional tools may help to identify advantages and disadvantages of polymeric aneurysm treatment. We assessed the value of high-resolution videography to compare in vitro embolization characteristics of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (VIN), cellulose acetate polymer (ACE), and urethane copolymer (UCO). METHODS: In a "neck-up" glass aneurysm model, solutions of 8% and 12% VIN, 8% and 12% ACE, and 8% UCO were introduced through a microcatheter into a xanthan gum solution at three flow rates: full physiological (62 cm/s), half physiological, and flow arrest. Each formulation was then introduced into a "neck-down" aneurysm model at flow arrest, for a total of 20 experiments. Results were tabulated for six different categories: outflow tail formation, inflow-zone polymer-mass deformation, inflow-zone migration, detachment tail formation, adherent mass pullout, and conjectural net effect. RESULTS: Of the 20 experiments, nine had unacceptable results because of potential clinical complications. The results were unacceptable in four of eight VIN experiments, four of eight ACE experiments, and one of four UCO experiments. VIN performance was more dependent on flow arrest than the more viscous ACE. The growth of the ACE solutions was most circumferential, with balloonlike growth characteristics, little inflow-zone effects, and fewer outflow tails than seen with VIN. All compounds had the potential for partial catheter adhesion and catheter-adhesing tails. UCO had the highest percentage of favorable results and the lowest percentage of unfavorable results. CONCLUSION: Videographic analysis allows detailed assessment of the dynamic embolization characteristics of polymers, revealing potential advantages of compounds such as UCO.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:Aneurysms have been clinically and experimentally treated with various surgical and endovascular methods, including endovascular polymer instillation. Additional tools may help to identify advantages and disadvantages of polymeric aneurysm treatment. We assessed the value of high-resolution videography to compare in vitro embolization characteristics of ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (VIN), cellulose acetate polymer (ACE), and urethane copolymer (UCO). METHODS: In a "neck-up" glass aneurysm model, solutions of 8% and 12% VIN, 8% and 12% ACE, and 8% UCO were introduced through a microcatheter into a xanthan gum solution at three flow rates: full physiological (62 cm/s), half physiological, and flow arrest. Each formulation was then introduced into a "neck-down" aneurysm model at flow arrest, for a total of 20 experiments. Results were tabulated for six different categories: outflow tail formation, inflow-zone polymer-mass deformation, inflow-zone migration, detachment tail formation, adherent mass pullout, and conjectural net effect. RESULTS: Of the 20 experiments, nine had unacceptable results because of potential clinical complications. The results were unacceptable in four of eight VIN experiments, four of eight ACE experiments, and one of four UCO experiments. VIN performance was more dependent on flow arrest than the more viscous ACE. The growth of the ACE solutions was most circumferential, with balloonlike growth characteristics, little inflow-zone effects, and fewer outflow tails than seen with VIN. All compounds had the potential for partial catheter adhesion and catheter-adhesing tails. UCO had the highest percentage of favorable results and the lowest percentage of unfavorable results. CONCLUSION: Videographic analysis allows detailed assessment of the dynamic embolization characteristics of polymers, revealing potential advantages of compounds such as UCO.
Authors: A Ruebben; M Merlo; A Verri; D Rossato; D Savio; S Tettoni; P L Muratore; C Rabbia Journal: J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) Date: 1997-06 Impact factor: 1.888
Authors: T Terada; Y Nakamura; K Nakai; M Tsuura; T Nishiguchi; S Hayashi; T Kido; W Taki; H Iwata; N Komai Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 1991-10 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: April Huckleberry; William Merritt; Trevor Cotter; Christopher Settanni; Mark C Preul; Andrew F Ducruet; Timothy Andrew Becker Journal: Surg Neurol Int Date: 2021-07-06