Literature DB >> 17368834

Technical limitations of carotid filter embolic protection devices.

Mark K Eskandari1, Samer F Najjar, Jon S Matsumura, Melina R Kibbe, Mark D Morasch.   

Abstract

Improved carotid artery stenting (CAS) results are credited to the development of embolic protection devices (EPDs). Reported are outcomes and technical failures of two classes of EPDs: distal balloon occlusion and distal filtration. We present a retrospective review of 206 CAS procedures from April 2001-September 2005. Filters (AccuNet, Angioguard, Filterwire, or Emboshield) were used in 98 cases (48%), distal balloon occlusion (PercuSurge) in 94 (46%), and no protection in 14. Data include demographics and procedural records. Mean age was 70 years (76% men, 24% women). At 30 days, there were no deaths, no myocardial infarctions, two major ipsilateral strokes (1%), two minor posterior strokes (1%), four transient ischemic attacks (2%), and one major access site complication (0.5%). Major neurologic events were equally divided between balloon occlusion and filters. Mean balloon occlusion time was 12 min, with only two patients (2%) manifesting reversible neurologic intolerance during flow arrest. In the last 100 cases, filter devices were preferentially used due to preserved antegrade flow. However, 11 cases (11%) necessitated intraoperative switching to balloon occlusion because of either extreme tortuosity or severe stenosis of the target lesion precluding passage of the filter element. CAS-specific equipment has improved procedural results. Despite theoretic advantages of filter EPDs, up to 10% of lesions are either too narrow or tortuous to allow safe passage of the filter element. Switching to a distal balloon occlusion system, which is well tolerated, may be preferred to unprotected predilation. Practitioners of CAS should be versed in both.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17368834     DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2006.07.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0890-5096            Impact factor:   1.466


  6 in total

1.  Locking between a cerebral protection device and a stent-delivering catheter during carotid artery stenting.

Authors:  Jong Hun Lee; Sung Won Youn; Ho Kyun Kim
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 1.610

Review 2.  Management of extracranial carotid artery disease.

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

3.  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

Review 4.  Carotid artery stenting: current and emerging options.

Authors:  Simon Morr; Ning Lin; Adnan H Siddiqui
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2014-10-20

5.  Utility of Intravascular Ultrasound During Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting with Proximal Protection.

Authors:  Simon Morr; Kunal Vakharia; Andrew A Fanous; Muhammad Waqas; Adnan H Siddiqui
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-06-18

6.  Mid-term and late results of endovascular treatment for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis under proximal protection.

Authors:  Paweł Latacz; Marian Simka; Marcin Krzanowski; Katarzyna Krzanowska; Paweł Brzegowy; Bartłomiej Łasocha; Tadeusz J Popiela
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 1.195

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.