Kallmes D F, McGraw J K, Evans A J, Mathis J M, Hergenrother R W, Jensen M E, Cloft H J, Lopes M, Dion J E
Department of Radiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville 22908, USA.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1997 Aug;18(7):1243-51.
To assess in a swine model the in vivo thrombogenicity of various microcatheters and guiding catheters as a function of catheter material, catheter coating, and duration of implantation.
Microcatheters (Tracker 18 and Fastracker 18, Target Therapeutics, Fremont, Calif; Magic 1.8, Balt, Montmorency, France; and Transit, Cordis Endovascular Systems, Miami Lakes, Fla) were placed through 6F guiding catheters (Fasguide, Target Therapeutics, and Envoy, Cordis Endovascular Systems) into the common carotid arteries of swine for 30 minutes (short term), 90 minutes (medium term), and 35 days (long term). Guiding catheters were implanted for 5 hours. At the end of the implantation periods the catheters were retracted and fixed for scanning electron microscopy.
The surface of the Fastracker microcatheter was devoid of debris after both short- and medium-term implantation. The Tracker microcatheter had minimal accumulation of cellular elements whereas the Transit microcatheter showed moderate accumulation of nondeformed red blood cells. Neither the Tracker nor the Transit microcatheter showed evidence of increasing debris accumulation after medium-term implantation as compared with short-term implantation. The Magic microcatheter was coated with gross thrombus after both short- and medium-term implantation. The Fasguide guiding catheter was nearly devoid of debris, while the Envoy guiding catheter had moderate thrombus formation. Long-term implantation of the Fastracker microcatheter was well tolerated whereas that of the Transit catheter resulted in vessel occlusion.
Hydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters are less thrombogenic than their nonhydrophilic counterparts, but not all hydrophilic coatings are equally hypothrombogenic. Degree of thrombogenicity depends on catheter material rather than surface morphology. Medium-term implantation did not yield increasing thrombus formation relative to short-term implantation.
在猪模型中评估各种微导管和引导导管的体内血栓形成性，作为导管材料、导管涂层和植入持续时间的函数。
将微导管（Tracker 18和Fastracker 18，Target Therapeutics，弗里蒙特，加利福尼亚州；Magic 1.8，Balt，蒙特莫伦西，法国；以及Transit，Cordis血管内系统公司，迈阿密湖，佛罗里达州）通过6F引导导管（Fasguide，Target Therapeutics，以及Envoy，Cordis血管内系统公司）置入猪的颈总动脉中30分钟（短期）、90分钟（中期）和35天（长期）。引导导管植入5小时。在植入期结束时，将导管撤回并固定以进行扫描电子显微镜检查。
短期和中期植入后，Fastracker微导管表面均无碎片。Tracker微导管的细胞成分积累极少，而Transit微导管显示未变形红细胞有中度积累。与短期植入相比，Tracker和Transit微导管在中期植入后均未显示碎片积累增加的迹象。短期和中期植入后，Magic微导管均被大量血栓覆盖。Fasguide引导导管几乎没有碎片，而Envoy引导导管有中度血栓形成。Fastracker微导管的长期植入耐受性良好，而Transit导管的长期植入导致血管闭塞。
亲水性微导管和引导导管比非亲水性同类产品的血栓形成性更低，但并非所有亲水性涂层的抗血栓形成能力都相同。血栓形成程度取决于导管材料而非表面形态。与短期植入相比，中期植入并未导致血栓形成增加。
