Vessel wall damage caused by cerebral protection devices:: Ex vivo evaluation in porcine carotid arteries

PURPOSE: To determine the extent of vessel wall damage caused by cerebral protection devices designed for carotid angioplasty using ex vivo porcine carotid arteries MATERIALS AND METHODS: The local animal experimentation committee did not require its approval for this. study. With a benchtop vascular, model (flow rate, 470 mL/min; dicrotic pulsatile flow, 76 pulses. per minute; pressure, 115/67 mm Hg [mean pressure, 91 mm Hg]) into which 85 porcine internal carotid arteries (ICAS) were inserted, five different protection devices (Angioguard [Cordis/Johnson & Johnson, Miami, Fla], Filterwire EX [Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass], Trap [Microvena, White. Bear Lake,. Minn], Neuroshield [Abbott Laboratories, Redwood City, Califl, and Percusurge [Abbott Laboratories were evaluated. Adverse movement (1 cm,up 2 cm down, and I cm up again) of the activated devices (deployed filters or inflated balloons [Percusurge onlyl).was simulated, and the device was retrieved. For each of these steps (deployment, movement, retrieval) the amount of debris, from the vessel wall in the effluent of the ICA was determined by. using a 100-mu m filter. The Mann-Whitney test was used to test for differences, and a correction for multiple comparisons was made. P < .05 was considered to indicate a significant difference. The authors attempted to determine, whether there was a notable association between the total amount of debris captured and the classification of damage at microscopy. Carotid arteries were analyzed histologically with light and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: All examined protection devices caused dislodged debris, which was captured in the effluent filter. There were significant differences among the devices in terms of the total amount of debris captured in the filters (lowest amounts of debris, 4.75 mg [Angioguard] and 5.02 mg (Filterwire EX]; highest amount, 7.51 mg [Trap]; P <= .001 for all). All devices caused histologically visible wall damage, with the degree of intimal denudation correlating with the mass of the debris. The Trap device caused the most severe intimal and subintimal wall damage. Adverse movement resulted in no increased debris dislodgment as compared with the debris dislodged during deployment and retrieval of the devices. CONCLUSION: On the basis of the data obtained, cerebral protection devices themselves have a potential influence on embolization rates by causing debris to be dislodged during carotid stent placement. (C) RSNA, 2005.