Intravenous versus intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography: Occlusion rate and complication assessment of experimental aneurysms after flow diverter treatment in rabbits.
Animal studies
aneurysm
digital subtraction angiography
flow diverter
Journal
Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences
ISSN: 2385-2011
Titre abrégé: Interv Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9602695
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
6
11
2018
medline:
6
8
2019
entrez:
6
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Conventional intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography, which requires surgical exposure and ligation of the femoral or carotid artery, is a limited method of evaluating elastase-induced aneurysms in New Zealand white rabbits. The purpose of this study was to assess aneurysm morphology, occlusion rates and complications after flow diverter treatment comparing intravenous and intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography. We previously published a preclinical study in which we evaluated the occlusion rates of elastase-induced aneurysms after treatment with a prototype flow diverter, by using intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography at three months ( n = 9) and six months ( n = 9). In addition to that intravenous digital subtraction angiography before treatment, after one month (early follow-up group) and after three months (late follow-up group) was performed. Occlusion rates were compared within the two groups by means of residual contrast filling. Baseline aneurysm characteristics revealed no significant differences between intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography and intravenous digital subtraction angiography. Aneurysm occlusion rates in both follow-up groups using intravenous digital subtraction angiography were significantly higher compared to intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (early follow-up group: intravenous digital subtraction angiography (one month) versus intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (three months); p = 0.03 and late follow-up group: intravenous digital subtraction angiography (three months) versus intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography (six months); p = 0.04). Intravenous digital subtraction angiography is feasible to detect and reproduce device occlusions, in-stent stenosis and post-stent stenosis. Intravenous digital subtraction angiography can not give a sufficient statement on the aneurysm occlusion process compared to intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography and is therefore not recommended for imaging follow-up after flow diverter treatment in rabbits. Regarding untreated aneurysms and complications like device occlusions, in-stent stenosis and post-stent stenosis intravenous digital subtraction angiography proofed to be a good alternative to intra-arterial digital subtraction angiography in our study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30394843
doi: 10.1177/1591019918808537
pmc: PMC6448376
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
157-163Références
Radiology. 1999 Oct;213(1):223-8
pubmed: 10540666
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2001 Apr;22(4):698-703
pubmed: 11290481
Rofo. 2004 Apr;176(4):590-6
pubmed: 15088186
Neuroradiology. 2005 Oct;47(10):792-5
pubmed: 16133485
Stroke. 2007 Aug;38(8):2346-52
pubmed: 17615366
Stroke. 2009 Mar;40(3):952-8
pubmed: 19150864
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009 Jun;30(6):1153-8
pubmed: 19369609
Radiology. 2013 Jun;267(3):858-68
pubmed: 23418004
J Clin Neurosci. 2014 Feb;21(2):203-6
pubmed: 24128768
Neuroradiology. 2013 Nov 14;:null
pubmed: 24233131
Interv Neuroradiol. 2014 Dec;20(6):729-35
pubmed: 25496683
Clin Neuroradiol. 2017 Sep;27(3):335-343
pubmed: 26699192
Neuroradiology. 2016 Oct;58(10):987-996
pubmed: 27457491
World Neurosurg. 2016 Nov;95:229-240
pubmed: 27514698
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jan;38(1):105-112
pubmed: 27811135
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Feb;38(2):323-326
pubmed: 28056454
Radiol Med. 2018 Jun;123(6):449-455
pubmed: 29380260
Neuroradiology. 1988;30(2):91-7
pubmed: 3290698