New England Center for Stroke Research, Department of Radiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.
Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital, Paris, France.
J Neurointerv Surg. 2018 Apr;10(4):406-411. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013175. Epub 2017 Jul 8.
Thromboembolic complications remain a limitation of flow diverting stents. We hypothesize that phosphorilcholine surface modified flow diverters (Pipeline Flex with Shield Technology, sPED) would have less acute thrombus formation on the device surface compared with the classic Pipeline Embolization device (cPED).
Elastase-induced aneurysms were created in 40 rabbits and randomly assigned to receive cPED or sPED devices with and without dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (four groups, n=10/group). Angioplasty was performed to enhance apposition and create intimal injury for a pro-thrombotic environment. Both before and after angioplasty, the flow diverter was imaged with intravascular optical coherence tomography. The outcome measure was the number of predefined segments along the implant relative to the location of the aneurysm with a minimum of 0 (no clot formation) and maximum of 3 (all segments with thrombus). Clot formation over the device at ostia of branch arteries was assessed as either present or absent.
Following angioplasty, the number of flow diverter segments with clots was significantly associated with the flow diverter (p<0.0001), but not with DAPT (p=0.3872) or aneurysm neck size (p=0.8555). The incidence rate for clots with cPED was 1.72 times more than with sPED. The clots on the flow diverter at the location corresponding to side branch ostia was significantly lower with sPED than with cPED (OR 0.180; 95% CI 0.044 to 0.734; p=0.0168), but was not associated with DAPT (p=0.3198).
In the rabbit model, phosphorilcholine surface modified flow diverters are associated with less thrombus formation on the surface of the device.
血栓栓塞并发症仍然是血流导向支架的局限性。我们假设磷酰胆碱表面修饰的血流导向装置(Pipeline Flex with Shield Technology,sPED)与经典 Pipeline 栓塞装置(cPED)相比,在装置表面形成的急性血栓形成会更少。
在 40 只兔子中创建弹性蛋白酶诱导的动脉瘤,并将其随机分配接受 cPED 或 sPED 装置,同时接受或不接受双联抗血小板治疗(DAPT)(四组,每组 n=10)。进行血管成形术以增强贴壁并产生易形成血栓的内膜损伤。在血管成形术前后,用血管内光学相干断层扫描对血流导向装置进行成像。主要观察指标为沿植入物相对于动脉瘤位置的预定节段数量,最小值为 0(无血栓形成),最大值为 3(所有节段均有血栓)。评估分支动脉口处装置上的血栓形成情况,分为存在或不存在。
血管成形术后,血流导向装置节段有血栓的数量与血流导向装置显著相关(p<0.0001),但与 DAPT(p=0.3872)或动脉瘤颈部大小(p=0.8555)无关。cPED 的血栓发生率是 sPED 的 1.72 倍。sPED 的侧支开口处血流导向装置上的血栓明显低于 cPED(OR 0.180;95%CI 0.044 至 0.734;p=0.0168),但与 DAPT 无关(p=0.3198)。
在兔模型中,磷酰胆碱表面修饰的血流导向装置与装置表面血栓形成减少有关。