Safety and Efficacy of Flow Reversal in Acute and Elective Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting Using the Mo.Ma Device with Short-Term Follow-Up.

Q1 Medicine Interventional Neurology Pub Date : 2020-01-01 Epub Date: 2019-08-05 DOI:10.1159/000499045
Ambooj Tiwari, Ryan Bo, Keithan Sivakumar, Karthikeyan M Arcot, Philip Ye, David T Parrella, Jeffrey Farkas
{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Flow Reversal in Acute and Elective Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting Using the Mo.Ma Device with Short-Term Follow-Up.","authors":"Ambooj Tiwari,&nbsp;Ryan Bo,&nbsp;Keithan Sivakumar,&nbsp;Karthikeyan M Arcot,&nbsp;Philip Ye,&nbsp;David T Parrella,&nbsp;Jeffrey Farkas","doi":"10.1159/000499045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the safety and efficacy of flow reversal following proximal flow arrest as an embolic protection strategy for carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) with short-term follow-up.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We performed a retrospective review of our CAS database for patients who underwent stent-supported carotid revascularization in the setting of acute/subacute stroke or TIA. We reviewed clinical and radiographic data during a 36-month period. Primary outcome was clinical evidence of ipsilateral stroke in the first 30 days. Secondary outcomes include clinical outcomes and sonographic and/or angiographic follow-up over 6 months, 6-month functional scale, and all-cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-five patients underwent CAS using flow reversal: 26 females and 29 males with a mean age of 69.7 years. Median time to treatment from index event was 3 days. 11% underwent stenting as part of hyperacute stroke therapy. Average luminal stenosis was 86%. The 9-Fr Mo.Ma device was used in combination with Penumbra aspiration in all cases. There were no ipsilateral strokes. Incidence of any ischemic event was 3.64%, but only 1 (1.82%) patient had a postoperative stroke. Clinical follow-up was available for 94.5%, while lesion follow-up was available for 73% of patients. Three patients had evidence of restenosis, but none were symptomatic. Luminal restenosis was ≤30% in all three. Median pre- and post-NIHSS were 1 and 1, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Flow reversal using the Mo.Ma device is a safe and effective strategy in preventing distal embolization during carotid artery revascularization.</p>","PeriodicalId":46280,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000499045","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000499045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2019/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective: To determine the safety and efficacy of flow reversal following proximal flow arrest as an embolic protection strategy for carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) with short-term follow-up.

Method: We performed a retrospective review of our CAS database for patients who underwent stent-supported carotid revascularization in the setting of acute/subacute stroke or TIA. We reviewed clinical and radiographic data during a 36-month period. Primary outcome was clinical evidence of ipsilateral stroke in the first 30 days. Secondary outcomes include clinical outcomes and sonographic and/or angiographic follow-up over 6 months, 6-month functional scale, and all-cause mortality.

Results: Fifty-five patients underwent CAS using flow reversal: 26 females and 29 males with a mean age of 69.7 years. Median time to treatment from index event was 3 days. 11% underwent stenting as part of hyperacute stroke therapy. Average luminal stenosis was 86%. The 9-Fr Mo.Ma device was used in combination with Penumbra aspiration in all cases. There were no ipsilateral strokes. Incidence of any ischemic event was 3.64%, but only 1 (1.82%) patient had a postoperative stroke. Clinical follow-up was available for 94.5%, while lesion follow-up was available for 73% of patients. Three patients had evidence of restenosis, but none were symptomatic. Luminal restenosis was ≤30% in all three. Median pre- and post-NIHSS were 1 and 1, respectively.

Conclusion: Flow reversal using the Mo.Ma device is a safe and effective strategy in preventing distal embolization during carotid artery revascularization.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Mo.Ma装置在急性和择期颈动脉成形术和支架置入术中血流逆转的安全性和有效性及短期随访。
目的:通过短期随访,确定近端血流停搏后血流逆转作为颈动脉成形术和支架置入术(CAS)栓塞保护策略的安全性和有效性。方法:我们对CAS数据库中急性/亚急性卒中或TIA患者接受支架支撑颈动脉血运重建术的患者进行了回顾性分析。我们回顾了36个月期间的临床和放射学资料。主要终点是前30天同侧卒中的临床证据。次要结局包括临床结局、6个月以上超声和/或血管造影随访、6个月功能评分和全因死亡率。结果:55例患者采用血流逆转行CAS:女性26例,男性29例,平均年龄69.7岁。从指数事件到治疗的中位时间为3天。11%的患者接受了支架置入术作为超急性卒中治疗的一部分。平均管腔狭窄率为86%。所有病例均采用9-Fr Mo.Ma装置联合半影吸出。没有同侧中风。所有缺血性事件的发生率为3.64%,但只有1例(1.82%)患者发生了术后卒中。临床随访率为94.5%,病变随访率为73%。3例患者有再狭窄的证据,但无症状。3例患者管腔再狭窄发生率均≤30%。nihss前后的中位数分别为1和1。结论:在颈动脉重建术中使用Mo.Ma装置进行血流逆转是一种安全有效的预防颈动脉远端栓塞的策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Interventional Neurology
Interventional Neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recanalization of Tandem Vertebrobasilar Occlusions with Contralateral Vertebral Occlusion or Hypoplasia via either Direct Passage or the SHERPA Technique. Does the Addition of Non-Approved Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for rtPA Impact Treatment Rates? Findings in Australia, the UK, and the USA. In vitro Remote Aspiration Embolectomy for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke. Endovascular Reperfusion for Acute Isolated Cervical Carotid Occlusions: The Concept of "Hemodynamic Thrombectomy". An Appraisal of the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1