scholarly journals Gastric Artery Embolization: Studying Effects of Catheter Type and Injection Method on Bead Distributions within a Benchtop Arterial Model

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaphan R Jernigan ◽  
Jason A Osborne ◽  
Gregory D Buckner

Abstract Aims: To investigate the effect of catheter type and injection method on microsphere distributions, specifically vessel targeting accuracy. Materials and Methods: The study utilized three catheter types (a standard micro-catheter, a Surefire anti-reflux catheter, and an Endobar occlusion balloon catheter) and both manual and computer-controlled injection schemes. A closed-loop, dynamically pressurized surrogate arterial system was assembled to replicate arterial flow for bariatric embolization procedures. Four vessel branches immediately distal to the injection site were targeted for embolization. Embolic microspheres were injected into the model using three catheter types (a standard micro-catheter, a Surefire anti-reflux catheter, and an Endobar occlusion balloon catheter) and both manual and computer-controlled injections. Results: Across all injection methods, the catheter effect on the proportion of microspheres to target vessels (vs. non-target vessels) was significant (p=0.005). The catheter effect on the number of non-target vessels embolized was significant (p=0.059). Across all catheter types, the injection method effect was not statistically significant for either of two outcome measures (percent microspheres to target vessels: p=0.265, number of non-target vessels embolized: p=0.148). Conclusion: Catheter type had a significant effect on targeting accuracy across all injection methods. The Endobar catheter exhibited a higher targeting accuracy in pairwise comparisons with the other two injection catheters across all injection schemes and when considering the Endobar catheter with the manifold injection method vs. each of the catheters with the manual injection method; the differences were significant in 3 of 4 analyses. The injection method effect was not statistically significant across all catheter types and when considering the Endobar catheter/Endobar manifold combination vs. Endobar catheter injections with manual and pressure-replicated methods.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaphan R Jernigan ◽  
Jason A Osborne ◽  
Gregory D Buckner

Abstract Aims: To investigate the effect of catheter type and injection method on microsphere distributions, specifically vessel targeting accuracy. Materials and Methods: The study utilized three catheter types (a standard micro-catheter, a Surefire anti-reflux catheter, and an Endobar occlusion balloon catheter) and both manual and computer-controlled injection schemes. A closed-loop, dynamically pressurized surrogate arterial system was assembled to replicate arterial flow for bariatric embolization procedures. Four vessel branches immediately distal to the injection site were targeted for embolization. Embolic microspheres were injected into the model using three catheter types (a standard micro-catheter, a Surefire anti-reflux catheter, and an Endobar occlusion balloon catheter) and both manual and computer-controlled injections. Results: Across all injection methods, the catheter effect on the proportion of microspheres to target vessels (vs. non-target vessels) was significant (p=0.0051). The catheter effect on the number of non-target vessels embolized was significant (p=0.0590). Across all catheter types, the injection method effect was not statistically significant for either of two outcome measures (percent microspheres to target vessels: p=0.2652, number of non-target vessels embolized: p=0.1476). Conclusion: Catheter type had a significant effect on targeting accuracy across all injection methods. The Endobar catheter exhibited a higher targeting accuracy in pairwise comparisons with the other two injection catheters across all injection schemes and when considering the Endobar catheter with the manifold injection method vs. each of the catheters with the manual injection method; the differences were significant in 3 of 4 analyses. The injection method effect was not statistically significant across all catheter types and when considering the Endobar catheter/Endobar manifold combination vs. Endobar catheter injections with manual and pressure-replicated methods.


2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Bartolini ◽  
Raphaël Blanc ◽  
Silvia Pistocchi ◽  
Hocine Redjem ◽  
Gabriele Ciccio ◽  
...  

Introduction The technique of balloon remodeling allows the endovascular treatment of wide-neck intracranial aneurysms. For many years the only available devices were the Hyperform and the Hyperglide balloon catheters. Recently, other companies have developed newer devices, single or dual-lumen. We present our initial experience with the TransForm occlusion balloon catheter for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Methods We retrospectively analysed from our prospectively gathered aneurysm database all aneurysms that were treated with balloon remodelling using TransForm occlusion balloon catheters from January 2013 to February 2014. We assessed patient demographics, morphological features of the aneurysms, procedure feasibility, technical and clinical complications. Results Thirty-three patients harbouring 36 intracranial saccular aneurysms were treated during 33 procedures. Clinical finding were: 15 incidental discovery, 13 subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), five aneurysms with mass effect, one ruptured aneurysm with SAH and mass effect, one recanalisation and one intraparenchymal haematoma. Thirty-five aneurysms were in the anterior and one in the posterior circulation. Mean dome and neck size were, respectively, 5.8 mm and 3.6 mm. Twenty-three aneurysms were treated with TransForm C and 13 with TransForm SC. We had two procedural thromboembolic complications, without permanent clinical events. No early rebleeding occurred. Conclusions In our small series, the TransForm occlusion balloon catheter seems to be safe and effective for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms, in ruptured and unruptured cases.


2006 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Dirim ◽  
M. I. Tekin ◽  
C. Aytekin ◽  
L. Peskircioglu ◽  
F. Boyvat ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document