N. prodotti: 0
Totale ordine: € 0,00
Pech M., Dudeck O., Seidensticker M., Zapasnik A., Brzozowski K., Wieners G., Ricke J.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
Aim: The aim of this paper was to compare wire-braided and non-braided microcatheters.
Methods: In this prospective, randomized, open study 100 standard catheters were used, 50 non-braided and 50 braided. Patients due for arterial embolization by standard platinum microcoils were assigned randomly before the intervention to coil insertion with the braided or with the non-braided catheter. Details and assessments of the procedure were recorded, including microcatheter stability, pushability, trackability and visibility, any complications, X-ray exposure time and the amount of contrast enhancement agent consumed.
Results: Forty-six evaluations of the non-braided and 47 of the braided model in a total of 93 patients were possible. The numbers of guiding catheters required and the times to insertion of the microcatheter were roughly equal; the braided microcatheters required a shorter fluoroscopy time, but this difference was statistically insignificant. For the braided microcatheter there were fewer cases where an additional guide wire was needed and the total procedure time was longer. Fluoroscopy times and amounts of contrast agent used were similar.
Conclusion: Coil embolization was conducted satisfactorily with both catheter types. The braided microcatheter with larger inner lumen may offer a good compromise for combination interventions (coil plus particle), especially if large particles are required for adequate embolization.