» Articles » PMID: 24084627

Flow Reversal Versus Filter Protection: a Pilot Carotid Artery Stenting Randomized Trial

Abstract

Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative treatment for patients presenting symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. The improvement in clinical outcomes with CAS has been associated with the development of embolic protection devices. The trial aim is to compare flow reversal versus filter protection during CAS through femoral access.

Methods And Results: Patients were randomly enrolled in CAS using flow reversal or filter protection. The primary end points were the incidence, number, and size of new ischemic brain lesions after CAS. The secondary end points included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, transient ischemic attack, and definitive ischemic brain lesions on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery magnetic resonance image at a 3-month follow-up. Ischemic brain lesions were assessed by a 3T magnetic resonance image. Neurological outcomes were evaluated by means of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale and the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Forty consecutive patients were randomly assigned. Compared with flow reversal (n=21), filter protection (n=19) resulted in a significant reduction in the incidence (15.8% versus 47.6%, P=0.03), number (0.73 versus 2.6, P=0.05), and size (0.81 versus 2.23 mm, P=0.05) of new ischemic brain lesions. Two patients, 1 from each group, presented transient ischemic attack at 3-month follow-up. There were no major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in the hospital or at 3-month follow-up.

Conclusions: In this small sample size trial, filter protection was more effective than flow reversal in reducing ischemic brain lesions during CAS through femoral approach.

Clinical Trial Registration Url: http://portal2.saude.gov.br/sisnep/. Unique identifier: 0538.0.004.000-10.

Citing Articles

Forearm access for carotid artery stenting using the dual protection of flow reversal and distal filter: Trans-forearm dual protection technique.

Hanaoka Y, Koyama J, Kubota Y, Nakamura T, Kitamura S, Yamazaki D Interv Neuroradiol. 2024; :15910199241270903.

PMID: 39166282 PMC: 11571155. DOI: 10.1177/15910199241270903.


Strategy of carotid artery stenting as first-line treatment and carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis: A single-center experience.

Okamoto T, Inoue Y, Oi Y, Taniyama I, Houri T, Teramukai S Surg Neurol Int. 2022; 13:513.

PMID: 36447860 PMC: 9699868. DOI: 10.25259/SNI_820_2022.


Secular Trends in Procedural Stroke or Death Risks of Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Muller M, von Felten S, Algra A, Becquemin J, Bulbulia R, Calvet D Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2019; 12(8):e007870.

PMID: 31378071 PMC: 6823842. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.007870.


Silent brain infarcts on diffusion-weighted imaging after carotid revascularisation: A surrogate outcome measure for procedural stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Traenka C, Engelter S, Brown M, Dobson J, Frost C, Bonati L Eur Stroke J. 2019; 4(2):127-143.

PMID: 31259261 PMC: 6591767. DOI: 10.1177/2396987318824491.


Transcervical Carotid Artery Stenting Without Flow Reversal: A Report of Two Cases.

Assaad M, Berry A, Zughaib M Am J Case Rep. 2019; 20:15-20.

PMID: 30606999 PMC: 6330995. DOI: 10.12659/AJCR.912769.