Periprocedural Embolic Events Related to Carotid Artery Stenting Detected by Diffusion-Weighted MRI: Comparison between Proximal and Distal Embolus Protection Devices

Purpose: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of proximal versus distal embolus protection devices (EPD) during carotid artery angioplasty/stenting (CAS) based on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). Methods: Forty-four patients (31 men; mean age 68 years, range 48–85) underwent p...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of endovascular therapy 2007-06, Vol.14 (3), p.293-303
Main Authors: El-Koussy, Marwan, Schroth, Gerhard, Do, Dai-Do, Gralla, Jan, Nedeltchev, Krassen, von Bredow, Ferdinand, Remonda, Luca, Brekenfeld, Caspar
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Angioplasty, Balloon - adverse effects
Angioplasty, Balloon - instrumentation
Blood clots
Carotid Stenosis - pathology
Carotid Stenosis - therapy
Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Embolism - diagnosis
Embolism - etiology
Embolism - prevention & control
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Magnetic Resonance Angiography - methods
Male
Medical imaging
Medical treatment
Middle Aged
Patients
Prosthesis Design
Risk factors
Severity of Illness Index
Stents
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Vein & artery diseases
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Purpose: To evaluate and compare the efficacy of proximal versus distal embolus protection devices (EPD) during carotid artery angioplasty/stenting (CAS) based on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). Methods: Forty-four patients (31 men; mean age 68 years, range 48–85) underwent protected CAS and had DW-MRI before and after the intervention. The cohort was analyzed according to the type of EPD used: a proximal EPD was deployed in 25 (56.8%) patients (17 men; mean age 66 years, range 48–85) and a distal filter in 19 (14 men; mean age 70 years, range 58–79). Fifteen (60.0%) patients with proximal protection were symptomatic of the target lesion; in the distal protection group, 10 (52.6%) were symptomatic. Results: New lesions were seen on the postinterventional DW-MRI in 28.0% (7/25) of the proximal EPD group versus 32.6% (6/19) of those with a distal filter (p=NS). The majority were clinically silent. The new lesions in the vascular territory of the stented carotid artery in the group as a whole and per patient were fewer in the proximal EPD group (p=NS). No significant differences were noted in the T2 appearance of the new lesions or the number of new lesions observed away from the vascular territory of the stented artery. Conclusion: Proximal embolus protection devices show a nonsignificant trend toward fewer embolic events, which warrants large-scale studies. Furthermore, proximal protection devices can be useful to control and treat acute in-stent thrombosis.
ISSN:1526-6028
1545-1550
DOI:10.1583/06-1990.1