PURPOSE: No filter protection devices for carotid artery stenting (CAS) have been formally approved for use in Japan; however, as of April 2008, the Angioguard XP (AGXP) was approved. This article describes our initial results using the AGXP during CAS for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of 15 patients (14 men) with a mean age of 72.3 years (range 53-81 years) were treated by CAS using the AGXP. Among them, 10 were symptomatic with >50% stenosis of the common or internal carotid artery (ICA), and 5 were asymptomatic with >70% stenosis. The rates of technical success, periprocedural stroke, ICA flow impairment, filter movement, and development of new ischemic lesions on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were assessed. RESULTS: CAS using the AGXP was successful in all cases. There was one minor stroke, and flow impairment occurred in six patients. Filter movement averaged 1.9 vertebral bodies. DWI showed new ipsilateral ischemic lesions in eight of the patients. CONCLUSION: Initial clinical experience using the AGXP for CAS has been generally sufficient. However, attention must be paid to three problems when using the AGXP: the filter may move after placement; the filter may disturb blood flow in the ICA; and debris may pass around the filter.
PURPOSE: No filter protection devices for carotid artery stenting (CAS) have been formally approved for use in Japan; however, as of April 2008, the Angioguard XP (AGXP) was approved. This article describes our initial results using the AGXP during CAS for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A group of 15 patients (14 men) with a mean age of 72.3 years (range 53-81 years) were treated by CAS using the AGXP. Among them, 10 were symptomatic with >50% stenosis of the common or internal carotid artery (ICA), and 5 were asymptomatic with >70% stenosis. The rates of technical success, periprocedural stroke, ICA flow impairment, filter movement, and development of new ischemic lesions on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) were assessed. RESULTS:CAS using the AGXP was successful in all cases. There was one minor stroke, and flow impairment occurred in six patients. Filter movement averaged 1.9 vertebral bodies. DWI showed new ipsilateral ischemic lesions in eight of the patients. CONCLUSION: Initial clinical experience using the AGXP for CAS has been generally sufficient. However, attention must be paid to three problems when using the AGXP: the filter may move after placement; the filter may disturb blood flow in the ICA; and debris may pass around the filter.
Authors: F Grego; P Frigatti; P Amistà; S Lepidi; M Antonello; C Carollo; G P Deriu Journal: J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 1.888
Authors: B Reimers; N Corvaja; S Moshiri; S Saccà; R Albiero; C Di Mario; P Pascotto; A Colombo Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-07-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kenneth Ouriel; Mark H Wholey; Pierre Fayad; Barry T Katzen; Patrick Whitlow; Michael Frentzko; Richard E Kuntz; Lawrence Wechsler; Nelson Hopkins; Lowell Satler; Greg Mishkel; Jay S Yadav Journal: J Endovasc Ther Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 3.487
Authors: Ivan P Casserly; Alex Abou-Chebl; Robert B Fathi; David S Lee; Jacqueline Saw; Jose E Exaire; Samir R Kapadia; Christopher T Bajzer; Jay S Yadav Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-09-23 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Barry T Katzen; Frank J Criado; Stephen R Ramee; Douglas W Massop; L Nick Hopkins; Dennis Donohoe; Sidney A Cohen; Laura Mauri Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: K Takayama; T Taoka; H Nakagawa; K Myouchin; T Wada; M Sakamoto; K Furuichi; S Iwasaki; S Kurokawa; K Kichikawa Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-05-17 Impact factor: 3.825