Literature DB >> 15542277

Effect of two different neuroprotection systems on microembolization during carotid artery stenting.

Andrej Schmidt1, Klaus-Werner Diederich, Susanne Scheinert, Sven Bräunlich, Tatjana Olenburger, Giancarlo Biamino, Gerhard Schuler, Dierk Scheinert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the efficacy of two different cerebral protection systems for the prevention of embolization during carotid artery stenting (CAS) using a transcranial Doppler (TCD) monitoring with the detection of microembolic signals (MES).
BACKGROUND: Despite the introduction of cerebral protection systems, neurologic complications during CAS cannot completely be prevented. Transcranial Doppler and detection of MES may aid in assessing the efficacy of different neuroprotection systems.
METHODS: A total of 42 patients with internal carotid artery stenoses were treated by CAS using either a filter (E.P.I. FilterWire, Boston Scientific Corp., Santa Clara, California) (n = 21) or a proximal endovascular clamping device (MO.MA system, Invatec s.r.l., Roncadelle, Italy) (n = 21). Microembolic signal counts were compared during five phases: placement of the protection device, passage of the stenosis, stent deployment, balloon dilation, and retrieval of the protection device.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in clinical or angiographic outcomes between the two groups. Compared to the filter device, the MO.MA system significantly reduced MES counts during the procedural phases of wire passage of the stenosis, stent deployment, balloon dilation, and in total (MES counts for the filter device were 25 +/- 22, 73 +/- 49, 70 +/- 31, and 196 +/- 84 during the three phases and in total, MES counts for the MO.MA system were 1.8 +/- 3.2, 11 +/- 19, 12 +/- 21, and 57 +/- 41, respectively; p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to a filter device the MO.MA system led to significantly lower MES counts during CAS. The detection of MES by TCD may facilitate the evaluation and comparison of different neuroprotection systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15542277     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.08.049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  11 in total

1.  Carotid artery stenting with distal filter protection: single-center experience in high-surgical-risk patients.

Authors:  Rainer Knur
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2010-10-30       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 2.  Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy: new results in perspective.

Authors:  William J Perkins; Guiseppe Lanzino; Thomas G Brott
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 7.616

3.  Safety Outcomes Using a Proximal Protection Device in Carotid Stenting of Long Carotid Stenoses.

Authors:  Kunakorn Atchaneeyasakul; Priyank Khandelwal; Sudheer Ambekar; Kevin Ramdas; Luis Guada; Dileep Yavagal
Journal:  Interv Neurol       Date:  2016-06-16

4.  Diffusion-weighted MR imaging in carotid angioplasty and stenting with protection by the reversed carotid arterial flow.

Authors:  F Asakura; K Kawaguchi; H Sakaida; N Toma; S Matsushima; K Kuraishi; H Tanemura; Y Miura; M Maeda; W Taki
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Carotid stenting through the right brachial approach for left internal carotid artery stenosis and bovine aortic arch configuration.

Authors:  Piero Montorsi; Stefano Galli; Paolo Ravagnani; Sarah Ghulam Ali; Daniela Trabattoni; Franco Fabbiocchi; Alessandro Lualdi; Giovanni Ballerini; Daniele Andreini; Gianluca Pontone; Andrea Annoni; Antonio L Bartorelli
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 6.  Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amir Gahremanpour; Emerson C Perin; Guilherme Silva
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2012

7.  Comparison of dual protection and distal filter protection as a distal embolic protection method during carotid artery stenting: a single-center carotid artery stenting experience.

Authors:  Yosuke Kajihara; Shigeyuki Sakamoto; Yoshihiro Kiura; Kazutoshi Mukada; Takahiro Chaki; Shiro Kajihara; Kaoru Kurisu
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 3.042

8.  Safety of embolic protection device-assisted and unprotected intravascular ultrasound in evaluating carotid artery atherosclerotic lesions.

Authors:  Piotr Musialek; Piotr Pieniazek; Wieslawa Tracz; Lukasz Tekieli; Tadeusz Przewlocki; Anna Kablak-Ziembicka; Rafal Motyl; Zbigniew Moczulski; Jakub Stepniewski; Mariusz Trystula; Wojciech Zajdel; Agnieszka Roslawiecka; Krzysztof Zmudka; Piotr Podolec
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2012-02

Review 9.  Transcervical access, reversal of flow and mesh-covered stents: New options in the armamentarium of carotid artery stenting.

Authors:  Kosmas I Paraskevas; Frank J Veith
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2017-05-26

10.  Comparison of anti-embolic protection with proximal balloon occlusion and filter devices during carotid artery stenting: clinical and procedural outcomes.

Authors:  Ersan Tatli; Ali Buturak; Yasemin Grunduz; Emir Dogan; Mustafa Alkan; Murat Sayin; Mustafa Yilmaztepe; Selcuk Atakay
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2013-09-16       Impact factor: 1.426

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.