S Peschillo1, F Diana2, J Berge3, P Missori4. 1. Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, Endovascular Neurosurgery/Interventional Neuroradiology, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 2. Department of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomo-Pathological Sciences, Interventional Neuroradiology, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Rome, Italy. 3. Neuroradiology Department, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France. 4. Department of Neurology and Psychiatry Neurosurgery, 'Sapienza' University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been amply demonstrated that endovascular procedures can be successful treatment for stroke, both in terms of revascularization and clinical outcome. There is not, however, a published comparison of any histological or ultrastructural damage to the vessels that may be caused by a direct aspiration first pass technique (ADAPT) or stent retrievers (SR) used in these procedures. This study analyses and compares acute damage to the arterial wall caused by ADAPT or SR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Damage to the walls of swine extracranial arteries was evaluated after ADAPT with the Penumbra system or thrombectomy with an SR (Solitaire 6×30). The procedures were performed after injecting thrombi into the selected arteries (arteries with diameters similar to those of the human internal carotid artery and first segment of the middle cerebral artery). After the procedures, the animal was euthanized and 12 arterial samples were obtained for analysis by optical and electronic microscopy. RESULTS: Tissue samples from the vessels treated with SR showed almost complete loss of endothelium, thickening of the internal elastic lamina, and degeneration of the elastic fibers of the bordering lamina media and adventitia. In contrast, tissue samples of the vessels treated with ADAPT had a clear integral internal elastic lamina and uninterrupted endothelial lining, although cell alignment was altered and there were surface lacerations due to manipulation of the samples. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques caused acute damage to the vessel walls, however, thrombectomy with SR appeared to be more harmful to all layers of the arterial wall, particularly the endothelium. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
BACKGROUND: It has been amply demonstrated that endovascular procedures can be successful treatment for stroke, both in terms of revascularization and clinical outcome. There is not, however, a published comparison of any histological or ultrastructural damage to the vessels that may be caused by a direct aspiration first pass technique (ADAPT) or stent retrievers (SR) used in these procedures. This study analyses and compares acute damage to the arterial wall caused by ADAPT or SR. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Damage to the walls of swine extracranial arteries was evaluated after ADAPT with the Penumbra system or thrombectomy with an SR (Solitaire 6×30). The procedures were performed after injecting thrombi into the selected arteries (arteries with diameters similar to those of the human internal carotid artery and first segment of the middle cerebral artery). After the procedures, the animal was euthanized and 12 arterial samples were obtained for analysis by optical and electronic microscopy. RESULTS: Tissue samples from the vessels treated with SR showed almost complete loss of endothelium, thickening of the internal elastic lamina, and degeneration of the elastic fibers of the bordering lamina media and adventitia. In contrast, tissue samples of the vessels treated with ADAPT had a clear integral internal elastic lamina and uninterrupted endothelial lining, although cell alignment was altered and there were surface lacerations due to manipulation of the samples. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques caused acute damage to the vessel walls, however, thrombectomy with SR appeared to be more harmful to all layers of the arterial wall, particularly the endothelium. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Authors: S Prothmann; B Friedrich; T Boeckh-Behrens; C Zimmer; J Kaesmacher; K Lucia; C Maegerlein Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: A Lindenholz; I C van der Schaaf; A G van der Kolk; H B van der Worp; A A Harteveld; L J Kappelle; J Hendrikse Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Marion Boulanger; Bertrand Lapergue; Francis Turjman; Emmanuel Touzé; René Anxionnat; Serge Bracard; Michel Piotin; Benjamin Gory Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Andrej Klepanec; Jan Harsany; Jozef Haring; Miroslav Mako; Matus Hoferica; Matej Rusina; Juraj Cisar; Georgi Krastev Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Sami Al Kasab; Girish Bathla; Alberto Varon; Jorge A Roa; Ryan Sabotin; Ashrita Raghuram; Wu Chaorong; David M Hasan; Tanya N Turan; Rano Chatterjee; Edgar A Samaniego Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2021-05-20