| Literature DB >> 26833539 |
Kajo van der Marel1, Ju-Yu Chueh1, Olivia W Brooks1, Robert M King1, Miklos G Marosfoi1, Erin T Langan1, Sarena L Carniato2, Matthew J Gounis1, Raul G Nogueira3, Ajit S Puri1.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Rapid revascularization in emergent large vessel occlusion with endovascular embolectomy has proven clinical benefit. We sought to measure device-clot interaction as a potential mechanism for efficient embolectomy.Entities:
Keywords: CT; Stent; Stroke; Technique; Thrombectomy
Year: 2016 PMID: 26833539 PMCID: PMC5136713 DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012209
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Neurointerv Surg ISSN: 1759-8478 Impact factor: 5.836
Figure 1The circle of Willis model used in this study. Bilateral M2 divisions of the middle cerebral arteries and the A2 segments of the anterior cerebral arteries were designed to rejoin distally. In all there were three inputs to the model (red arrows) and four outlets (green arrows).
Figure 2From left to right: Iso-intensity surfaces representing the device were extracted to guide the identification of individual wires. Seed points were manually placed to extract each of the wires (red). Manual seed points were placed to initialize the level-set segmentation of the clot which, after post-processing, was displayed as a surface model (green). Along consecutive points on the centerline, a Steiner circumellipse was fit to the closest points on the three marker wires (red) to model the interior of the device (blue).
Figure 3Representative cases in a hard clot model with different Trevo deployment techniques (left, straight unsheathing; right, initial unsheathing followed by pushing the device and spontaneous retraction of the microcatheter). Stent surface shown in blue, clot surface shown in transparent green. Insets show cross-sectional images of the device–clot interaction at different locations along the length of the stent. Sharp focal hyperintensities (arrowhead) are the device marker wires. Note track of stent impregnation into the clot (arrow).
Figure 4Box plot of the clot integration factor immediately following deployment indicating a significant increase as a function of deployment delivery technique when the device engaged hard clot (p<0.05). No significant difference was found in the soft clot model.
Figure 5Total number of clot fragments >200 μm for each technique and clot model used.
Figure 6Box plot of the difference in clot integration factor between the post-deployment and final runs in the hard clot and soft clot models showing the effect of time on clot integration. Positive values indicate an increase in clot integration. Outliers are indicated by black dots. There was a small but significant increase overall for both models, and a significant increase in the hard clot model for the pushing but not the unsheathing technique.