Carotid Wallstent Versus Roadsaver Stent and Distal Versus Proximal Protection on Cerebral Microembolization During Carotid Artery Stenting

The aim of this study was to randomly compare the double-layer Roadsaver stent (RS) (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) with the single-layer Carotid Wallstent (CW) (Boston Scientific, Santa Clara, California) in association with either distal embolic protection with the FilterWire (FW) device (Boston Scientific...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:JACC. Cardiovascular interventions 2020-02, Vol.13 (4), p.403-414
Hauptverfasser: Montorsi, Piero, Caputi, Luigi, Galli, Stefano, Ravagnani, Paolo M., Teruzzi, Giovanni, Annoni, Andrea, Calligaris, Giuseppe, Fabbiocchi, Franco, Trabattoni, Daniela, de Martini, Stefano, Grancini, Luca, Pontone, Gianluca, Andreini, Daniele, Troiano, Sarah, Restelli, Davide, Bartorelli, Antonio L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this study was to randomly compare the double-layer Roadsaver stent (RS) (Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) with the single-layer Carotid Wallstent (CW) (Boston Scientific, Santa Clara, California) in association with either distal embolic protection with the FilterWire (FW) device (Boston Scientific) or proximal protection with the Mo.Ma Ultra device (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) in patients with lipid-rich carotid plaques. The role of both stent type and brain protection during carotid artery stenting (CAS) remains unsettled. A total of 104 consecutive patients with carotid artery stenosis were randomized to CAS with FW + RS (group 1, n = 27), FW + CW (group 2, n = 25), Mo.Ma + RS (group 3, n = 27), or Mo.Ma + CW (group 4, n = 25). The primary endpoint was the number of microembolic signals (MES) on transcranial Doppler among groups in the following CAS steps: 1 and 2) target vessel access; 3) lesion wiring; 4) pre-dilation; 5) stent crossing; 6) stent deployment; 7) stent dilation; and 8) device retrieval and deflation. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were found among the 4 groups. Compared with the FW device, the Mo.Ma Ultra device significantly reduced mean MES count (p 
ISSN:1936-8798
1876-7605
DOI:10.1016/j.jcin.2019.09.007