Use of the Parodi anti-embolism system in carotid stenting: Italian trial results.

PURPOSE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of the Parodi anti-embolism system (PAES) in establishing flow reversal in the internal carotid artery (ICA) as a means of protecting against embolic phenomena during carotid stenting. METHODS: Seven centers participated in a nonrandomized, prospective trial of carotid angioplasty and stenting under PAES protection in 30 patients (22 men; mean age 72 years, range 49-88) with 15 symptomatic (>70%) and 15 asymptomatic (>80%) stenotic ICAs. Safety was defined as achieving sufficient brain oxygenation during flow reversal as determined by level of awareness and motor control. The presence of new or enhanced neurological deficits and death were endpoints. Performance was based on angiographic evidence of successful retrograde flow. RESULTS: The PAES was positioned in all 30 patients, but technical error and access-related difficulties prevented establishment of reversed flow in 2. Among the 28 (93%) patients treated under PAES protection, 1 patient developed aphasia after flow reversal, necessitating balloon deflation between subsequent stages of the procedure. Three other adverse events included 1 case of bradycardia and 2 cases of hypotension, with dysarthria and facial paresis in one and temporary loss of consciousness in the other. All events resolved with appropriate therapy, and there was no change from baseline in the neurological status or brain scans at 24 hours. There were no strokes or neurological deficits at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The PAES appears to be a safe and effective means of providing protection from embolic complications during carotid stenting.

Noninvasive diagnosis of incomplete endovascular aneurysm repair: D-dimer assay to detect type I endoleaks and nonshrinking aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To test the hypothesis that D-dimer (D-D), a cross-linked fibrin degradation product of an ongoing thrombotic event, could be a marker for incomplete aneurysm exclusion after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: In a multicenter study, 83 venous blood samples were collected from 74 AAA endograft patients and controls. Twenty subjects who were >6 months postimplantation and had evidence of an endoleak and/or an unmodified or increasing AAA sac diameter formed the test group. Controls were 10 nondiseased subjects >65 years old, 18 AAA surgical candidates, and 26 postoperative endograft patients with no endoleak and a shrinking aneurysm. Blood samples were analyzed for D-D through a latex turbidimetric immunoassay. The endograft patients were stratified into 5 clinical groups for analysis: no endoleak and decreasing sac diameter, no endoleak and increasing/unchanged sac diameter, type II endoleak and decreasing sac diameter, type II endoleak and increasing/unchanged sac diameter, and type I endoleak. RESULTS: Individual D-D values were highly variable, but differences among clinical groups were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). D-D values did not vary significantly between patients with stable, untreated AAAs and age-matched controls (238 +/- 180 ng/mL versus 421 +/- 400 ng/mL, p > 0.05). Median D-D values increased at 4 days postoperatively (963 ng/mL versus 382 ng/mL, p > 0.05) and did not vary thereafter if there was no endoleak and the aneurysm sac decreased. D-D mean values were higher in patients with type I endoleak (1931 +/- 924 ng/mL, p < 0.005) and those with unchanged/increasing sac diameters (1272 +/- 728 ng/mL) than in cases with decreasing diameters (median 638 +/- 238 ng/mL) despite the presence of endoleak (p < 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Elevated D-D may prove to be a useful marker for fixation problems after endovascular AAA repair and may help rule out type I endoleak, thus excluding patients from unnecessary invasive tests.