Literature DB >> 15950562

Morphometric analysis of particulate debris extracted by four different embolic protection devices from coronary arteries, aortocoronary saphenous vein conduits, and carotid arteries.

Vu-Hung Quan1, Rany Huynh, Philip A Seifert, Arun Kuchela, Wai-Hong Chen, Gabor Sütsch, Andrew C Eisenhauer, Campbell Rogers.   

Abstract

Different embolic protection devices have been introduced for endovascular interventions: filters or balloon occlusion and aspiration systems. Despite widening use in a variety of vascular beds and clinical syndromes, little is known about the particulate burden liberated from different vascular beds and caught by different protection devices. We performed histologic and morphometric analyses of particulate debris captured during stenting of degenerated saphenous vein bypass grafts and native coronary arteries during acute myocardial infarction or during elective intervention and carotid arteries to assess the relative performance of different protection devices. We analyzed 232 interventions (90 saphenous vein bypass grafts, 77 native coronary arteries, and 65 carotid arteries) with 4 different devices (65 FilterWires, 99 Interceptors, 41 GuardWires, and 27 Proxis catheters) using the RapidVue particle analyzer. No difference in embolic volume retrieved was demonstrated between devices in saphenous vein bypass grafts and carotid interventions. A smaller volume of particulate debris was retrieved by the GuardWire compared with the FilterWire and the Proxis catheter in native coronary artery interventions. The Interceptor and the GuardWire captured more smaller particles than did the FilterWire or Proxis catheter. During saphenous vein bypass graft or carotid intervention, different embolic protection strategies were performed similarly. In native coronary artery stenting, however, proximal embolic protection retrieved larger amounts of debris than did distal filters or occlusion devices. These data may allow greater tailoring of embolic protection device development and application in specific anatomic locales.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15950562     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.02.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  4 in total

Review 1.  Management of extracranial carotid artery disease.

Authors:  Yinn Cher Ooi; Nestor R Gonzalez
Journal:  Cardiol Clin       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.213

2.  Multicenter evaluation of a self-expanding carotid stent system with distal protection in the treatment of carotid stenosis.

Authors:  M D Hill; W Morrish; G Soulez; A Nevelsteen; G Maleux; C Rogers; K E Hauptmann; A Bonafé; R Beyar; L Gruberg; J Schofer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Vascular resistance in the carotid artery: an in vitro investigation of embolic protection filters.

Authors:  Gail M Siewiorek; Mark H Wholey; Ender A Finol
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Radiol       Date:  2008-08-29       Impact factor: 3.464

Review 4.  A fresh look at coronary microembolization.

Authors:  Petra Kleinbongard; Gerd Heusch
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2021-11-16       Impact factor: 49.421

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.