Cargando…
Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device
PURPOSE: Preventing cerebral embolism from debris produced during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is important. This study compared the treatment outcomes of CAS using two types of filter-based embolic protection devices currently in use in Japan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed 121 consecutive cas...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-132 |
_version_ | 1782356082143789056 |
---|---|
author | Iko, Minoru Aikawa, Hiroshi Go, Yoshinori Nakai, Kanji Tsutsumi, Masanori Yu, Iwae Mizokami, Taichiro Sakamoto, Kimiya Inoue, Ritsuro Mitsutake, Takafumi Eto, Ayumu Hanada, Hayatsura Kazekawa, Kiyoshi |
author_facet | Iko, Minoru Aikawa, Hiroshi Go, Yoshinori Nakai, Kanji Tsutsumi, Masanori Yu, Iwae Mizokami, Taichiro Sakamoto, Kimiya Inoue, Ritsuro Mitsutake, Takafumi Eto, Ayumu Hanada, Hayatsura Kazekawa, Kiyoshi |
author_sort | Iko, Minoru |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Preventing cerebral embolism from debris produced during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is important. This study compared the treatment outcomes of CAS using two types of filter-based embolic protection devices currently in use in Japan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed 121 consecutive cases of CAS performed with FilterWire EZ™ between July 2010 and November 2012 and 37 consecutive cases of CAS performed with the Spider FX™ between November 2012 and June 2013. A Carotid Wallstent™ was used in all cases. The incidence of positive lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) and stroke were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Postoperative DWI-positive lesions were observed in 38 (31.4%) and 14 (37.8%) patients in the FilterWire and Spider groups, respectively. In the FilterWire group, complications were transient ischemic attacks in 3 (2.5%) patients, cerebral infarction in 2 (1.7%) patients (1 patient each with minor and major stroke), and cerebral hemorrhage due to hyperperfusion syndrome in 1 (0.8%) patient. In the Spider group, except for cerebral infarction (minor stroke) in 1 (2.7%) patient, no complications were observed. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of complications between the groups. CONCLUSION: FilterWire EZ and Spider FX are comparable in terms of treatment outcome. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4320198 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43201982015-02-11 Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device Iko, Minoru Aikawa, Hiroshi Go, Yoshinori Nakai, Kanji Tsutsumi, Masanori Yu, Iwae Mizokami, Taichiro Sakamoto, Kimiya Inoue, Ritsuro Mitsutake, Takafumi Eto, Ayumu Hanada, Hayatsura Kazekawa, Kiyoshi Springerplus Research PURPOSE: Preventing cerebral embolism from debris produced during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is important. This study compared the treatment outcomes of CAS using two types of filter-based embolic protection devices currently in use in Japan. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed 121 consecutive cases of CAS performed with FilterWire EZ™ between July 2010 and November 2012 and 37 consecutive cases of CAS performed with the Spider FX™ between November 2012 and June 2013. A Carotid Wallstent™ was used in all cases. The incidence of positive lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) and stroke were compared between the groups. RESULTS: Postoperative DWI-positive lesions were observed in 38 (31.4%) and 14 (37.8%) patients in the FilterWire and Spider groups, respectively. In the FilterWire group, complications were transient ischemic attacks in 3 (2.5%) patients, cerebral infarction in 2 (1.7%) patients (1 patient each with minor and major stroke), and cerebral hemorrhage due to hyperperfusion syndrome in 1 (0.8%) patient. In the Spider group, except for cerebral infarction (minor stroke) in 1 (2.7%) patient, no complications were observed. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of complications between the groups. CONCLUSION: FilterWire EZ and Spider FX are comparable in terms of treatment outcome. Springer International Publishing 2014-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4320198/ /pubmed/25674435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-132 Text en © Iko et al.; licensee Springer. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Iko, Minoru Aikawa, Hiroshi Go, Yoshinori Nakai, Kanji Tsutsumi, Masanori Yu, Iwae Mizokami, Taichiro Sakamoto, Kimiya Inoue, Ritsuro Mitsutake, Takafumi Eto, Ayumu Hanada, Hayatsura Kazekawa, Kiyoshi Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title | Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title_full | Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title_fullStr | Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title_full_unstemmed | Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title_short | Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
title_sort | treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4320198/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25674435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-132 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ikominoru treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT aikawahiroshi treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT goyoshinori treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT nakaikanji treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT tsutsumimasanori treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT yuiwae treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT mizokamitaichiro treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT sakamotokimiya treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT inoueritsuro treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT mitsutaketakafumi treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT etoayumu treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT hanadahayatsura treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice AT kazekawakiyoshi treatmentoutcomesofcarotidarterystentingwithtwotypesofdistalprotectionfilterdevice |