PURPOSE: Protected carotid artery stent placement is currently under clinical evaluation as a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy. The current study was undertaken to determine the incidence of new ischemic lesions found on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) in nonselected patients after protected carotid artery stent placement using a filter device and to determine the potential relationship between these new ischemic lesions and the presence or absence of a clear amount of debris captured by the neuroprotection filter device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nonrandomized cohort of 52 patients (40 men, 12 women) presenting with carotid occlusive disease underwent protected carotid artery stent placement using a filter device. DWI obtained 1 day before stent placement was compared with that obtained 1 day after stent placement. In addition, the macroscopic and microscopic analysis of debris captured by the filter device during the carotid stent placement procedure was assessed. RESULTS: Neuroprotected carotid stent placement was technically successful in all 53 procedures but was complicated by a transient ischemic attack in 3 patients (5.6%). In 22 patients (41.5%), new ischemic lesions were found on DWI, and in 21 filter devices (39.6%), a substantial amount of atheromatous plaque and/or fibrin was found. No clear relationship between the presence of debris captured by the filter device and new lesions detected by DWI was found (P = .087; odds ratio 3.067). CONCLUSION: Neuroprotected carotid artery stent placement will not avoid silent cerebral ischemia. Systematic microscopic analysis of debris captured by the filter device has no predictive value for potential cerebral ischemia after carotid artery stent placement.
PURPOSE: Protected carotid artery stent placement is currently under clinical evaluation as a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy. The current study was undertaken to determine the incidence of new ischemic lesions found on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) in nonselected patients after protected carotid artery stent placement using a filter device and to determine the potential relationship between these new ischemic lesions and the presence or absence of a clear amount of debris captured by the neuroprotection filter device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nonrandomized cohort of 52 patients (40 men, 12 women) presenting with carotid occlusive disease underwent protected carotid artery stent placement using a filter device. DWI obtained 1 day before stent placement was compared with that obtained 1 day after stent placement. In addition, the macroscopic and microscopic analysis of debris captured by the filter device during the carotid stent placement procedure was assessed. RESULTS: Neuroprotected carotid stent placement was technically successful in all 53 procedures but was complicated by a transient ischemic attack in 3 patients (5.6%). In 22 patients (41.5%), new ischemic lesions were found on DWI, and in 21 filter devices (39.6%), a substantial amount of atheromatous plaque and/or fibrin was found. No clear relationship between the presence of debris captured by the filter device and new lesions detected by DWI was found (P = .087; odds ratio 3.067). CONCLUSION: Neuroprotected carotid artery stent placement will not avoid silent cerebral ischemia. Systematic microscopic analysis of debris captured by the filter device has no predictive value for potential cerebral ischemia after carotid artery stent placement.
Authors: Stefan Müller-Hülsbeck; Thomas Jahnke; Carsten Liess; Christoph Glass; Friedrich Paulsen; Jan Grimm; Martin Heller Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Jan Albert Vos; Jos C van den Berg; Sjef M P G Ernst; Maarten Jan Suttorp; Timotheus T C Overtoom; Henk W Mauser; Oscar J M Vogels; Hans P M van Heesewijk; Frans L Moll; Yolanda van der Graaf; Willem P T Mali; Rob G A Ackerstaff Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-12-22 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: K P Forbes; H A Shill; P M Britt; J M Zabramski; R F Spetzler; J E Heiserman Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sarah E Vermeer; Niels D Prins; Tom den Heijer; Albert Hofman; Peter J Koudstaal; Monique M B Breteler Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: H Zwenneke Flach; Mohamed Ouhlous; Johanna M Hendriks; Marc R H M Van Sambeek; Jifke F Veenland; Peter J Koudstaal; Lukas C Van Dijk; Aad Van Der Lugt Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: M Leonardi; M Dall'olio; L Raffi; P Cenni; L Simonetti; R Marasco; F Giagnorio Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2008-06-30 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: A Kastrup; K Gröschel; T Nägele; A Riecker; F Schmidt; S Schnaudigel; U Ernemann Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-12-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: D Stojanov; M Ilic; P Bosnjakovic; M Zivkovic; S Jolic; N Vukasinovic; A Ignjatovic; B Ilic; D Benedeto-Stojanov Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-12-22 Impact factor: 3.825