Title of article
Microembolization During Carotid Artery Stenting in Patients With High-Risk, Lipid-Rich Plaque: A Randomized Trial of Proximal Versus Distal Cerebral Protection
Author/Authors
Montorsi، نويسنده , , Piero and Caputi، نويسنده , , Luigi and Galli، نويسنده , , Stefano and Ciceri، نويسنده , , Elisa and Ballerini، نويسنده , , Giovanni and Agrifoglio، نويسنده , , Marco and Ravagnani، نويسنده , , Paolo and Trabattoni، نويسنده , , Daniela and Pontone، نويسنده , , Gianluca and Fabbiocchi، نويسنده , , Franco and Loaldi، نويسنده , , Alessandro and Parati، نويسنده , , Eugenio and A، نويسنده ,
Issue Information
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2011
Pages
8
From page
1656
To page
1663
Abstract
Objectives
al of this study was to compare the rate of cerebral microembolization during carotid artery stenting (CAS) with proximal versus distal cerebral protection in patients with high-risk, lipid-rich plaque.
ound
al protection with filters partially reduces the cerebral embolization rate during CAS. Proximal protection has been introduced to further decrease embolization risk.
s
three consecutive patients with carotid artery stenosis and lipid-rich plaque were randomized to undergo CAS with proximal protection (MO.MA system, n = 26) or distal protection with a filter (FilterWire EZ, n = 27). Microembolic signals (MES) were assessed by using transcranial Doppler during: 1) lesion wiring; 2) pre-dilation; 3) stent crossing; 4) stent deployment; 5) stent dilation; and 6) device retrieval/deflation. Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was conducted before CAS, after 48 h, and after 30 days.
s
ts in the MO.MA group had higher percentage diameter stenosis (89 ± 6% vs. 86 ± 5%, p = 0.027) and rate of ulcerated plaque (35% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.019). Compared with use of the FilterWire EZ, MO.MA significantly reduced mean MES counts (p < 0.0001) during lesion crossing (mean 18 [interquartile range (IQR): 11 to 30] vs. 2 [IQR: 0 to 4]), stent crossing (23 [IQR: 11 to 34] vs. 0 [IQR: 0 to 1]), stent deployment (30 [IQR: 9 to 35] vs. 0 [IQR: 0 to 1]), stent dilation (16 [IQR: 8 to 30] vs. 0 [IQR: 0 to 1]), and total MES (93 [IQR: 59 to 136] vs. 16 [IQR: 7 to 36]). The number of patients with MES was higher with the FilterWire EZ versus MO.MA in phases 3 to 5 (100% vs. 27%; p < 0.0001). By multivariate analysis, the type of brain protection was the only independent predictor of total MES number. No significant difference was found in the number of patients with new post-CAS embolic lesion in the MO.MA group (2 of 14, 14%) as compared with the FilterWire EZ group (9 of 21, 42.8%).
sions
ients with high-risk, lipid-rich plaque undergoing CAS, MO.MA led to significantly lower microembolization as assessed by using MES counts. (Carotid Stenting in Patients With High Risk Carotid Stenosis [“Soft Plaque”] [MOMA]; NCT01274676)
Keywords
Carotid stenting , embolic protection , cerebral embolization
Journal title
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Serial Year
2011
Journal title
JACC (Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
Record number
1753031
Link To Document