Initial experience with a reversal-of-flow cerebral protection device in carotid angioplasty

Sidnei José Galego; Dino Fecci Colli Junior; Reinaldo Donatelli; Marcos Antonio Pereira Cardoso; Anderson Nadiak Bueno; Armando Carvalho de Lobato; João Antonio Corrêa; Salomão Goldman

doi:10.1590/S1677-54492013000100005

Original Article

Initial experience with a reversal-of-flow cerebral protection device in carotid angioplasty

Sidnei José Galego; Dino Fecci Colli Junior; Reinaldo Donatelli; Marcos Antonio Pereira Cardoso; Anderson Nadiak Bueno; Armando Carvalho de Lobato; João Antonio Corrêa; Salomão Goldman

http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1677-54492013000100005 J Vasc Bras, vol.12, n1, p.16-24, 2013

PDF

SciELO

Downloads: 0

Abstract

PURPOSE: To report initial findings with the GORE Flow Reversal System®, with a focus on major/minor adverse events in the 30 first postoperative days. METHODS: The first 24 patients submitted to carotid angioplasty using the GORE system, from June 2010 to May 2012, were retrospectively assessed with regard to indications, anatomic details, technical difficulties, and early clinical outcomes, including major (stroke, death, acute myocardial infarction) and minor (hematoma) adverse events. RESULTS: Systemic hypertension was present in 100% of the patients, diabetes mellitus in 58.3%, and coronary disease in 37.5%. Type II aortic arch was encountered in 62.5% of the patients and atherosclerotic lesion predominantly at the carotid bifurcation affecting the internal and common carotid arteries in 79.2%. Angiographic data revealed contralateral carotid arteries with <50% stenosis in 95.8% of cases and preservation of cerebral blood flow in 95.8%. All procedures but one were technically successful. Mean cerebral flow reversal time was 14.9 minutes, with a statistically significant difference between the first 12 (17.9 minutes) and the last 12 patients treated (11.6 minutes) (p<0.001). Intolerance to flow reversal was observed in 17.4% of the cases. Technical difficulties were experienced in 1 patient (4.2%). Clinical outcomes included 4.2% of stroke and 12.5% of hematomas at arterial puncture sites. CONCLUSION: The system was technically effective. A significant reduction in cerebral flow reversal time was observed, and the rates of early major/minor adverse events were within acceptable limits, suggesting that the device is safe and effective.

Keywords

angioplasty, cerebral protection, complications

References

Whitlow PL, Lylyk P, Londero H. Carotid artery stenting protected with an emboli containment system. Stroke. 2002;33:1308-14.

Clair DG, Hopkins LN, Mehta M. Neuroprotection during carotid artery stenting using the GORE flow reversal system: 30-day outcomes in the EMPiRE Clinical Study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;77:420-9.

Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:445-53.

Schonholz CJ, Uflacker R, Mendaro E. Techniques for carotid artery stenting under cerebral protection. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;46:201-17.

Allaqaband S, Kirvaitis R, Jan F, Bajwa T. Endovascular treatment of peripheral vascular disease. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2009;34:359-476.

Yadav JS, Wholey MH, Kuntz RE. Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1493-501.

Mas JL, Chatellier G, Beyssen B. Endarterectomy versus stenting in patients with symptomatic severe carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1660-71.

Ringleb PA, Allenberg J, Bruckmann H. 30 day results from the SPACE trial of stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2006;368:1239-47.

Brott TG, Hobson 2nd RW, Howard G. Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:11-23.

Ohki T, Roubin GS, Veith FJ, Iyer SS, Brady E. Efficacy of a filter device in the prevention of embolic events during carotid angioplasty and stenting: An ex vivo analysis. J Vasc Surg. 1999;30:1034-44.

Ohki T, Marin ML, Lyon RT. Ex vivo human carotid artery bifurcation stenting: correlation of lesion characteristics with embolic potential. J Vasc Surg. 1998;27:463-71.

Coggia M, Goeau-Brissonniere O, Duval JL, Leschi JP, Letort M, Nagel MD. Embolic risk of the different stages of carotid bifurcation balloon angioplasty: an experimental study. J Vasc Surg. 2000;31:550-7.

Gaunt ME, Martin PJ, Smith JL. Clinical relevance of intraoperative embolization detected by transcranial Doppler ultrasonography during carotid endarterectomy: a prospective study of 100 patients. Br J Surg. 1994;81:1435-9.

Purandare N, Burns A, Daly KJ. Cerebral emboli as a potential cause of Alzheimer's disease and vascular dementia: case-control study. BMJ. 2006;332:1119-24.

MacDonald S. Evidence for the routine use of carotid filters during carotid artery stenting. Controversies and updates in vascular surgery. 2006:128-31.

Gupta N, Corriere MA, Dodson TF. The incidence of microemboli to the brain is less with endarterectomy than with percutaneous revascularization with distal filters or flow reversal. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:316-22.

Wholey MH, Wholey M, Bergeron P. Current global status of carotid artery stent placement. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn. 1998;44:1-6.

Parodi JC, La Mura R, Ferreira LM. Initial evaluation of carotid angioplasty and stenting with three different cerebral protection devices. J Vasc Surg. 2000;32:1127-36.

Bates MC, Campbell JE. Pitfalls of embolic protection. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2011;14:101-7.

Macdonald S. Contemporary randomized trials comparing CAS and CEA: a critique of the EVA-3S, SPACE, ICSS, SAPPHIRE, and CREST studies. Endovasc Today. 2010;10:50-96.

Ederle J, Dobson J, Featherstone RL. Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010;375:985-97.

Parodi JC, Schonholz C, Parodi FE, Sicard G, Ferreira LM. Initial 200 cases of carotid artery stenting using a reversal-of-flow cerebral protection device. J Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;48:117-24.

Cremonesi A, Zuffi A, Gieowarsingh S, Carvalho de Campos Martins E, Castriota F. Endovascular carotid interventions. EuroIntervention. 2010;5:866-70.

Kasirajan K, Brewster L. The Emory experience. Endovasc Today. 2009;8:26-30.

Criado E, Doblas M, Fontcuberta J. Carotid angioplasty with internal carotid artery flow reversal is well tolerated in the awake patient. J Vasc Surg. 2004;40:92-7.

Mehta M, Taggert JB, Sternbach Y. The Albany Vascular Group experience. Endovasc Today. 2009;8:22-5.

Adami CA, Scuro A, Spinamano L. Use of the Parodi anti-embolism system in carotid stenting: Italian trial results. J Endovasc Ther. 2002;9:147-54.

Nikas DN, Ghany MA, Stabile E. Carotid artery stenting with proximal cerebral protection for patients with angiographic appearance of string sign. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:298-304.

Hobson RW 2nd, Howard VJ, Roubin GS. Carotid artery stenting is associated with increased complications in octogenarians: 30-day stroke and death rates in the CREST lead-in phase. J Vasc Surg. 2004;40:1106-11.

Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular (SBACV)"> Sociedade Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular (SBACV)">

Initial experience with a reversal-of-flow cerebral protection device in carotid angioplasty

Sidnei José Galego; Dino Fecci Colli Junior; Reinaldo Donatelli; Marcos Antonio Pereira Cardoso; Anderson Nadiak Bueno; Armando Carvalho de Lobato; João Antonio Corrêa; Salomão Goldman

Abstract

Keywords

References

Links

Share

J Vasc Bras