AIMS: Our aim was to determine (1) periprocedural and 30-day clinical safety and efficacy of the CGuard MicroNet-covered embolic prevention carotid stent system (MN-EPS) in routine use for unselected carotid stenosis (CS) patients undergoing CAS, as well as (2) feasibility of MN-EPS post-dilatation optimisation to minimise residual stenosis after CAS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a non-industry-funded, prospective academic study in all-referrals-tracked symptomatic and asymptomatic CS. In asymptomatic lesions, intervention was mandated only in case of increased stroke risk CS features. There was independent neurologist evaluation before CAS, at 48 hours and 30 days. There was external source data verification, angiographic core lab, and statistical analysis. Over 11 months, 108 referrals were recommended by the NeuroVascular Team for revascularisation: 101 (51-86 years, 55 symptomatic, evolving stroke in nine) underwent 106 (100% MN-EPS use) neuroprotection device-assisted (46% proximal, 54% distal) CAS; CEA was performed in seven. MN-EPS device success was 99.1%. Angiographic diameter stenosis was reduced from 83±9% to 6.7±5% (p<0.001). No MN-EPS foreshortening/elongation occurred (30 mm long was 29.82±0.68 mm; 40 mm long was 39.89±0.59 mm). The periprocedural death/major stroke/MI rate was 0%. One event, with no change in NIHSS or modified Rankin Scale and no clinical sequel, was adjudicated by the clinical events committee as minor stroke (0.9%). By 30 days there were no new events (0%). CONCLUSIONS: These increased risk consecutive patient data (1) indicate safety and efficacy of routine MN-EPS use in achieving endovascular reconstruction across all-comer CS lesion subsets, and (2) are consistent with MN-EPS protection against cerebral events extending throughout the stent healing period.
AIMS: Our aim was to determine (1) periprocedural and 30-day clinical safety and efficacy of the CGuard MicroNet-covered embolic prevention carotid stent system (MN-EPS) in routine use for unselected carotid stenosis (CS) patients undergoing CAS, as well as (2) feasibility of MN-EPS post-dilatation optimisation to minimise residual stenosis after CAS. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a non-industry-funded, prospective academic study in all-referrals-tracked symptomatic and asymptomatic CS. In asymptomatic lesions, intervention was mandated only in case of increased stroke risk CS features. There was independent neurologist evaluation before CAS, at 48 hours and 30 days. There was external source data verification, angiographic core lab, and statistical analysis. Over 11 months, 108 referrals were recommended by the NeuroVascular Team for revascularisation: 101 (51-86 years, 55 symptomatic, evolving stroke in nine) underwent 106 (100% MN-EPS use) neuroprotection device-assisted (46% proximal, 54% distal) CAS; CEA was performed in seven. MN-EPS device success was 99.1%. Angiographic diameter stenosis was reduced from 83±9% to 6.7±5% (p<0.001). No MN-EPS foreshortening/elongation occurred (30 mm long was 29.82±0.68 mm; 40 mm long was 39.89±0.59 mm). The periprocedural death/major stroke/MI rate was 0%. One event, with no change in NIHSS or modified Rankin Scale and no clinical sequel, was adjudicated by the clinical events committee as minor stroke (0.9%). By 30 days there were no new events (0%). CONCLUSIONS: These increased risk consecutive patient data (1) indicate safety and efficacy of routine MN-EPS use in achieving endovascular reconstruction across all-comer CS lesion subsets, and (2) are consistent with MN-EPS protection against cerebral events extending throughout the stent healing period.
Authors: Roman Machnik; Piotr Paluszek; Łukasz Tekieli; Karolina Dzierwa; Damian Maciejewski; Mariusz Trystuła; Andrzej Brzychczy; Krzysztof Banaszkiewicz; Robert Musiał; Piotr Pieniążek Journal: Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 1.426
Authors: Piotr Pieniążek; Przemysław Nowakowski; Krzysztof Ziaja; Adam Kobayashi; Wojciech Uchto; Jakub Sulżenko; Roman Machnik; Łukasz Tekieli; Dariusz Stańczyk; Krzysztof Plens; Wojciech Zasada; Artur Dziewierz; Damian Ziaja Journal: Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej Date: 2019-12-31 Impact factor: 1.426
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
Authors: Adam Mazurek; Krzysztof Malinowski; Kenneth Rosenfield; Laura Capoccia; Francesco Speziale; Gianmarco de Donato; Carlo Setacci; Christian Wissgott; Pasqualino Sirignano; Lukasz Tekieli; Andrey Karpenko; Waclaw Kuczmik; Eugenio Stabile; David Christopher Metzger; Max Amor; Adnan H Siddiqui; Antonio Micari; Piotr Pieniążek; Alberto Cremonesi; Joachim Schofer; Andrej Schmidt; Piotr Musialek Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Adam Mazurek; Anna Borratynska; Urszula Gancarczyk; Lukasz Czyz; Martyna Sikorska; Lukasz Tekieli; Bartosz Sobien; Marcin Jakiel; Mariusz Trystula; Tomasz Drazkiewicz; Piotr Podolec; Piotr Musialek Journal: J Diabetes Res Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 4.061
Authors: Tomas Klail; Christoph Kurmann; Johannes Kaesmacher; Adnan Mujanovic; Eike I Piechowiak; Tomas Dobrocky; Sara Pilgram-Pastor; Adrian Scutelnic; Mirjam R Heldner; Jan Gralla; Pasquale Mordasini Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2022-09-07 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Jakub Chmiel; Miłosz K Książek; Weronika Stryszak; Paweł Iwaszczuk; Mateusz K Hołda; Grażyna Świtacz; Artur Kozanecki; Piotr Wilkołek; Paweł Rubiś; Grzegorz Kopeć; Piotr Odrowąż-Pieniążek; Tadeusz Przewłocki; Wiesława Tracz; Piotr Podolec; Piotr Musiałek Journal: Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej Date: 2018-09-21 Impact factor: 1.426