HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Müller-Hülsbeck, S. Articles by Heller, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Müller-Hülsbeck, S. Articles by Heller, M.

Vessel Wall Damage Caused by Cerebral Protection Devices: Ex Vivo Evaluation in Porcine Carotid Arteries¹

¹ From the Department of Radiology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein–Campus Kiel, Arnold-Heller-Strasse 9, 24105 Kiel, Germany (S.M.H., P.S., J.H., C.L., T.J., M.H.); and Institute of Anatomy, Christian-Albrecht-University, Kiel, Germany (F.P.). Received December 5, 2003; revision requested February 12, 2004; final revision received July 13; accepted August 17. Address correspondence to S.M.H. (e-mail: muehue@rad.uni-kiel.de).

PURPOSE: To determine the extent of vessel wall damage caused by cerebral protection devices designed for carotid angioplasty by using ex vivo porcine carotid arteries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: The local animal experimentation committee did not require its approval for this study. With a benchtop vascular model (flow rate, 470 mL/min; dicrotic pulsatile flow, 76 pulses per minute; pressure, 115/67 mm Hg [mean pressure, 91 mm Hg]) into which 85 porcine internal carotid arteries (ICAs) were inserted, five different protection devices (Angioguard [Cordis/Johnson & Johnson, Miami, Fla], Filterwire EX [Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass], Trap [Microvena, White Bear Lake, Minn], Neuroshield [Abbott Laboratories, Redwood City, Calif], and Percusurge [Abbott Laboratories]) were evaluated. Adverse movement (1 cm up, 2 cm down, and 1 cm up again) of the activated devices (deployed filters or inflated balloons [Percusurge only]) was simulated, and the device was retrieved. For each of these steps (deployment, movement, retrieval) the amount of debris from the vessel wall in the effluent of the ICA was determined by using a 100-µm filter. The Mann-Whitney test was used to test for differences, and a correction for multiple comparisons was made. P < .05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. The authors attempted to determine whether there was a notable association between the total amount of debris captured and the classification of damage at microscopy. Carotid arteries were analyzed histologically with light and scanning electron microscopy.

RESULTS: All examined protection devices caused dislodged debris, which was captured in the effluent filter. There were significant differences among the devices in terms of the total amount of debris captured in the filters (lowest amounts of debris, 4.75 mg [Angioguard] and 5.02 mg [Filterwire EX]; highest amount, 7.51 mg [Trap]; P .001 for all). All devices caused histologically visible wall damage, with the degree of intimal denudation correlating with the mass of the debris. The Trap device caused the most severe intimal and subintimal wall damage. Adverse movement resulted in no increased debris dislodgment as compared with the debris dislodged during deployment and retrieval of the devices.

CONCLUSION: On the basis of the data obtained, cerebral protection devices themselves have a potential influence on embolization rates by causing debris to be dislodged during carotid stent placement.

© RSNA, 2005

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. K. Eskandari Preventable Complications of Carotid Stenting Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, March 1, 2008; 20(1): 17 - 25. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. S. Gurm, B. K. Nallamothu, and J. Yadav Safety of carotid artery stenting for symptomatic carotid artery disease: a meta-analysis Eur. Heart J., January 1, 2008; 29(1): 113 - 119. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Ribo, C. A. Molina, B. Alvarez, M. Rubiera, J. Alvarez-Sabin, and M. Matas Transcranial Doppler Monitoring of Transcervical Carotid Stenting With Flow Reversal Protection: A Novel Carotid Revascularization Technique Stroke, November 1, 2006; 37(11): 2846 - 2849. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kastrup, T. Nagele, K. Groschel, F. Schmidt, E. Vogler, J. Schulz, and U. Ernemann Incidence of New Brain Lesions After Carotid Stenting With and Without Cerebral Protection Stroke, September 1, 2006; 37(9): 2312 - 2316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. du Mesnil de Rochemont, S. Schneider, B. Yan, A. Lehr, M. Sitzer, and J. Berkefeld Diffusion-Weighted MR Imaging Lesions after Filter-Protected Stenting of High-Grade Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenoses AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., June 1, 2006; 27(6): 1321 - 1325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]