Noah Hong, Jeong-Mee Park, Seung Bin Kim, Young-Je Son
{"title":"使用远端栓塞保护装置进行颈动脉支架植入术时的血流阻滞:单中心经验及临床意义。","authors":"Noah Hong, Jeong-Mee Park, Seung Bin Kim, Young-Je Son","doi":"10.7461/jcen.2024.E2023.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to investigate the incidence of flow arrest during carotid artery stenting (CAS) with filter-type embolic protection device (EPD), identify any predisposing factors for those situations, and contemplate intraprocedural precautionary steps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CAS was performed in 128 patients with 132 arteries using filter-type EPD. The characteristics of treated patients and arteries were compared between groups with and without flow arrest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD was 17.4%. In flow arrest group, cases of vulnerable plaques (p=0.02) and symptomatic lesions (p=0.01) were significantly more common, and there were more cases of debris captured by EPD in a planar pattern (p<0.01). Vulnerable plaques were significantly more common in the procedures showing a planar pattern than in the cases with other patterns (p<0.01). Flow arrest group showed a significantly higher rate of ischemic complications (p<0.05), although there were no significant periprocedural neurological changes. The planar pattern of captured debris in filter-type EPD was the only significant risk factor for flow arrest (adjusted odds ratio 88.44, 95% confidence interval 15.21-514.45, p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD is not uncommon and associated with increased ischemic complications. Symptomatic stenoses and vulnerable plaque are related to this event. The planar pattern of captured debris on the EPD was the only significant risk factor for the flow arrest. Clinicians must pay attention to the occurrence of flow arrest and react quickly when performing CAS.</p>","PeriodicalId":94072,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery","volume":" ","pages":"163-173"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11220293/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Flow arrest during carotid artery stenting with a distal embolic protection device: A single-center experience and clinical implications.\",\"authors\":\"Noah Hong, Jeong-Mee Park, Seung Bin Kim, Young-Je Son\",\"doi\":\"10.7461/jcen.2024.E2023.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to investigate the incidence of flow arrest during carotid artery stenting (CAS) with filter-type embolic protection device (EPD), identify any predisposing factors for those situations, and contemplate intraprocedural precautionary steps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CAS was performed in 128 patients with 132 arteries using filter-type EPD. The characteristics of treated patients and arteries were compared between groups with and without flow arrest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD was 17.4%. In flow arrest group, cases of vulnerable plaques (p=0.02) and symptomatic lesions (p=0.01) were significantly more common, and there were more cases of debris captured by EPD in a planar pattern (p<0.01). Vulnerable plaques were significantly more common in the procedures showing a planar pattern than in the cases with other patterns (p<0.01). Flow arrest group showed a significantly higher rate of ischemic complications (p<0.05), although there were no significant periprocedural neurological changes. The planar pattern of captured debris in filter-type EPD was the only significant risk factor for flow arrest (adjusted odds ratio 88.44, 95% confidence interval 15.21-514.45, p<0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD is not uncommon and associated with increased ischemic complications. Symptomatic stenoses and vulnerable plaque are related to this event. The planar pattern of captured debris on the EPD was the only significant risk factor for the flow arrest. Clinicians must pay attention to the occurrence of flow arrest and react quickly when performing CAS.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"163-173\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11220293/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7461/jcen.2024.E2023.10.001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7461/jcen.2024.E2023.10.001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的我们的目的是调查使用过滤器型栓塞保护装置(EPD)进行颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)期间血流停止的发生率,找出导致这些情况的易感因素,并考虑术中的预防措施:对 128 名患者的 132 条动脉进行了 CAS,并使用了过滤型 EPD。方法:使用过滤器型 EPD 对 128 名患者的 132 条动脉进行了 CAS 治疗,比较了有血流阻断和无血流阻断两组患者和动脉的特征:结果:使用过滤器型 EPD 进行 CAS 时,血流停止的发生率为 17.4%。在血流阻断组中,易损斑块(p=0.02)和无症状病变(p=0.01)的病例明显增多,EPD以平面模式捕获碎屑的病例增多(p结论:在使用过滤器型 EPD 的 CAS 过程中,血流停滞并不少见,而且与缺血性并发症的增加有关。无症状狭窄和易损斑块与此事件有关。EPD上捕获碎片的平面形态是导致血流停止的唯一重要风险因素。临床医生必须关注血流阻断的发生,并在进行 CAS 时迅速做出反应。
Flow arrest during carotid artery stenting with a distal embolic protection device: A single-center experience and clinical implications.
Objective: We aimed to investigate the incidence of flow arrest during carotid artery stenting (CAS) with filter-type embolic protection device (EPD), identify any predisposing factors for those situations, and contemplate intraprocedural precautionary steps.
Methods: CAS was performed in 128 patients with 132 arteries using filter-type EPD. The characteristics of treated patients and arteries were compared between groups with and without flow arrest.
Results: The incidence of flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD was 17.4%. In flow arrest group, cases of vulnerable plaques (p=0.02) and symptomatic lesions (p=0.01) were significantly more common, and there were more cases of debris captured by EPD in a planar pattern (p<0.01). Vulnerable plaques were significantly more common in the procedures showing a planar pattern than in the cases with other patterns (p<0.01). Flow arrest group showed a significantly higher rate of ischemic complications (p<0.05), although there were no significant periprocedural neurological changes. The planar pattern of captured debris in filter-type EPD was the only significant risk factor for flow arrest (adjusted odds ratio 88.44, 95% confidence interval 15.21-514.45, p<0.05).
Conclusions: Flow arrest during CAS with filter-type EPD is not uncommon and associated with increased ischemic complications. Symptomatic stenoses and vulnerable plaque are related to this event. The planar pattern of captured debris on the EPD was the only significant risk factor for the flow arrest. Clinicians must pay attention to the occurrence of flow arrest and react quickly when performing CAS.