scholarly journals PS56. Impact of Distal Protection Filter Design in Thirty-Day Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting

2012 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 42S-43S
Author(s):  
Natasha Loghmanpour ◽  
Gail Siewiorek ◽  
Kelly Wanamaker ◽  
Mark Wholey ◽  
Rabih Chaer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Filter Design ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
Protection Filter

scholarly journals Assessing the impact of distal protection filter design characteristics on 30-day outcomes of carotid artery stenting procedures

2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-317.e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha A. Loghmanpour ◽  
Gail M. Siewiorek ◽  
Kelly M. Wanamaker ◽  
Satish C. Muluk ◽  
Rabih Chaer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Filter Design ◽  
Design Characteristics ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
Protection Filter ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device

SpringerPlus ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minoru Iko ◽  
Hiroshi Aikawa ◽  
Yoshinori Go ◽  
Kanji Nakai ◽  
Masanori Tsutsumi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
Protection Filter

Distal protection filter device efficacy with carotid artery stenting: comparison between a distal protection filter and a distal protection balloon

2012 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minoru Iko ◽  
Masanori Tsutsumi ◽  
Hiroshi Aikawa ◽  
Yoshihisa Matsumoto ◽  
Yoshinori Go ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
Protection Filter

Proximal versus Distal Protection During Carotid Artery Stenting: Analysis of the Two Treatment Approaches and Associated Clinical Outcomes

2014 ◽  
Vol 81 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 543-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxim Mokin ◽  
Travis M. Dumont ◽  
Joan Mihyun Chi ◽  
Connor J. Mangan ◽  
Tareq Kass-Hout ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Treatment Approaches ◽  
Distal Protection

scholarly journals New focal ischemia of the brain after carotid artery stenting despite distal protection

2002 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 67
Author(s):  
Joachim Schofer ◽  
Michael Schlueter ◽  
Thilo Tuebler ◽  
Johann C. Steffens ◽  
Giancarlo Blamino
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Focal Ischemia ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
The Brain

Abstract 1122‐000174: Stroke Risk of Carotid Artery Stenting Using Balloon‐Guide Catheter Versus Distal Embolic Protection Devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael I Nahhas ◽  
Grant J Meeks ◽  
Juan Carlos Martinez‐Gutierrez ◽  
Gary R Spiegel ◽  
Yazan Alderazi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Focal Neurological Deficit ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Guide Catheter ◽  
Primary Means ◽  
Protection Devices ◽  
Distal Protection ◽  
Proximal Occlusion

Introduction : Prevention of distal embolization during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a key element of procedural technique and is standardly performed using distal protection devices (DPDs). Data in support of DPDs, however, are limited. Here, we present our experience of proximal occlusion using a balloon guide catheter (BGC) during CAS as the primary method of distal embolic protection. Methods : We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing CAS at our healthcare system between January of 2018 to March of 2021. Procedures were categorized by embolic protection strategy: DPD or BGC (with or without DPD). Emergent cases were defined as patients receiving CAS within <24 hours of presenting with an ischemic stroke or TIA ipsilateral to the carotid disease side. Severe stenosis was defined as 70–99% per NASCET criteria. The primary outcome was rate of procedural ischemic stroke between the DPD and BGC groups, and was defined as acute focal neurological deficit lasting for ≥ 24 hours following CAS related to an embolic event during the procedure. Results : A total of 126 CAS procedures were performed during the study period. 91 cases were performed under proximal BGC protection (of which 24 also included DPD usage) and 35 CAS cases via DPD as a primary mean for embolic protection. The median age for the cohort was 68 [IQR 62‐76], 37% females, 31% (n = 39) cases were treated emergently, and elective cases were 69% (n = 87). Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups except for hyperlipidemia (BGC vs DPD, 71.4% vs 42.9%; p = 0.003) and history of smoking (BGC vs DPD, 56% vs 34.4%; p = 0.029). Severe carotid stenosis was present in 80.2% BGC group and 77.1% in DPD (p = 0.573). Post‐stenting balloon angioplasty was more frequent in the BGC group as compared with DPD (54% vs. 26%, BGC vs. DPD, p = 0.005). Procedural embolic stroke rates were low in both groups, and not significantly different (1.1% vs. 2.9%, BGC vs. DPD, p = 0.48). Conclusions : CAS with BGC as the primary means of distal embolic protection showed comparable, low rates of procedural embolic ischemic events compared to those with DPD. These findings suggest BGC embolic strategies may be a viable alternative to DPD usage.

Abstract WP155: The Safety And Efficacy Of Carotid Artery Stenting In A High Grade Stenosis More Than 80% Under Proximal Protection With Flow-reversal System.

Stroke ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rie Yako ◽  
Osamu Masuo ◽  
Hiroyuki Matsumoto ◽  
Naoyuki Nakao ◽  
Tomoaki Terada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Reverse Flow ◽  
Clinical Results ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Protection Device ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Ischemic Complication ◽  
Distal Protection

Background: Different embolic protection devices in carotid artery stenting(CAS) have been developed to prevent procedural cerebral embolization. Proximal flow reverse protection has theoretically advantages from the view point of prevention of distal embolism, compared with distal protection. On the other hand, there is a disadvantage that this system is complexity. Purpose: we evaluated the safety and efficacy of proximal reverse flow protection for CAS in patients with high-grade stenosis. Methods: Distal protection has mainly been used as protection device in our institute. In case that there was high possibility of distal embolism, proximal reverse flow protection has been used. These cases treated with proximal flow reverse protection were included in this study. A total of 75 patients(71 men, mean age 71.9 years) with a high grade stenosis≧80% were treated between September 2003 and March 2012. 72% (n=54) of the patients were symptomatic.The primary endpoint was death and stroke rate at 30 days. The outcome was also compared to data from 386 patients with a high-grade stenosis who were treated under only distal protection device in the same period. Results: The procedure was technically successful in all cases. In 2 cases out of proximal reverse flow protection group, intracerebral hemorrhage was occurred. However, there was no ischemic complication. In distal protection group, the incidence of complication occurred in 11 cases (7 ischemic, 4 otheres). The stroke/death rate at 30 days was 2.6% (n=2) in proximal reverse flow protection group compared to 2.8% (n=11) in the distal protection group. There was no significant difference. However, the incidence of ischemic complication in the proximal reverse flow protection group tended to be lower than that of distal protection group. Conclusion: In selected patients with large atherosclerotic plaques, the clinical results of CAS with proximal reverse flow protection is safe and feasible. Especially, the incidence of ischemic stroke was lower than that of distal protection.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document