4.3 Article

Carotid Artery Stenting in High Surgical Risk Patients Using the FiberNet® Embolic Protection System: The EPIC Trial Results

期刊

出版社

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.22386

关键词

PVD; carotid stenting; distal protection

资金

  1. Lumen Biomedical, Inc. (Plymouth, Minnesota)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The multicenter EPIC (Fiber Net Embolic Protection System in Carotid Artery Stenting Trial) single-arm trial evaluated the 30-day outcomes of a new design concept for embolic protection during carotid artery stenting (CAS). Background: Embolic protection filters available for use during CAS include fixed and over-the-wire systems that rely on embolic material capture within a basket structure. The Fiber Nee Embolic Protection System (EPS), which features a very low crossing profile, consists of a three-dimensional fiber-based filter distally mounted on a 0.014 inch guidewire with integrated aspiration during filter retrieval. Methods: The trial enrolled 237 patients from 26 centers. Demographics, clinical and lesion characteristics, as well as adverse events through a 30-day follow-up were recorded. The mean age of the patients was 74 years, 64% were male and 20% had symptomatic carotid artery disease. Results: The combined major adverse event (MAE) rate at 30 days for all death, stroke, and myocardial infarction was 3.0%. There were three major strokes (two ischemic and one hemorrhagic) and two minor strokes (both ischemic) for a 2.1% 30-day stroke rate. The procedural technical success rate was 97.5% and macroscopic evidence of debris was reported in 90.9% of the procedures. Conclusions: The Fiber Net EPS, used with commercially available stents, produced low stroke rates following CAS in high surgical risk patients presenting with carotid artery disease. The unique filter design including aspiration during retrieval may have contributed to the low 30-day stroke rate reported during CAS in patients considered at high risk for complications following carotid endarterectomy (CEA). (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据