Novel Use of GuideLiner with a Low-Profile Balloon for the Retrieval of Disrupted Balloon Catheter.

We report a case of successful percutaneous retrieval of an unexpectedly disrupted balloon catheter using GuideLiner and a low-profile balloon. The procedure and the mechanism of this novel technique were described in detail with ex-vivo testing. This case demonstrated the utility of the combination of GuideLiner and low-profile balloon as a bail-out for intravascular foreign body.

Angioscopic and optical coherence tomographic evaluation of neointimal coverage: 9 months after expandable polyterafluoroethylene covered stent implantation.

An expandable polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) covered stent is generally employed to seal coronary artery perforation. The frequency of ePTFE covered stent use is relatively low; thus, only a handful of studies have reported neointimal coverage and endothelialization inside the deployed ePTFE and clinical time course after ePTFE implantation. This case report presents a 78-year-old man treated with an ePTFE covered stent when he suffered from coronary artery perforation after the implantation of two everolimus eluting stents in the left anterior descending artery. Follow-up coronary angiography 9 months after ePTFE covered stent implantation depicted favorable stent patency. Optical coherence tomography showed thin and uneven stent strut coverage at the culprit. Angioscopy also depicted partial white-coated coverage and stent strut exposure. The outcome of this case suggested that long-term dual antiplatelet therapy should be prescribed for preventing thrombosis after ePTFE covered stent implantation.

Feasibility of kissing balloon technique through guide extension catheters: an experimental bench test.

Previous reports showed that GuideLiner (GL) and Guidezilla (GZ) can accommodate bulky and multiple devices beyond the official profiles. However, feasibility of kissing balloon technique (KBT) through these devices is unknown. The tested devices included 7Fr-GL/GZ and respective three types of 2.5 mm semi-compliant (SC) and non-compliant (NC) balloons: conventional model (CM), tapered-tip model (TM) and latest model (LM). First, three experienced operators attempted to advance all 21 combinations of the 2 balloons through GL/GZ on the guidewires and assessed the crossability in 3 grades: easy, difficult and impossible. Second, the only balloon combinations graded as easy by all operators were tested in the polyurethane-made bifurcation model which required KBT following cross-over stenting. Within the total of 42 device combinations, only one balloon combination of double LM-NC balloons was classified as easy in both GL/GZ by consensus opinion of the operators. While two combinations of LM-SC and LM-SC/NC balloons were classified as difficult in both GL/GZ, all four combinations of LM-SC/NC and CM/TM-NC balloons were classified as difficult only in GL. Other 32 combinations were all classified as impossible. In the bifurcation model, the combination of double LM-NC balloons using GL achieved KBT while the same balloon combination with GZ failed. The feasibility of KBT using child-catheter is highly dependent on the device characteristics. The combination of latest small-profile NC balloons through GL could be clinically applicable.

Interference Between Pressure-Wire and Deployed Coronary Stents: Insights from a Bench Test.

BACKGROUND: While several complications related to pressure-wire (PW) have been reported, mechanistic justification has not always been offered. Furthermore, interference between a PW and a protruding side-branch stent has not been previously reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate interference between PW-pullback from a main-branch with a protruded ostial stent deployed in a side-branch. METHODS: In a polyurethane bifurcation vessel model, PW-pullback was performed in a main-branch following protruded ostial stenting in a side-branch. Tested PWs included PressureWire X, Comet, OptoWire, and Verrata. For each PW, pullback was performed through the same proximal cell of the protruded stent 20 times. Interference during PW-pullback was objectively analyzed with a fiberscope placed at the distal main-branch and classified into 3 grades according to the interaction with stent strut. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the rate of interference between the PWs. No-interference, interference without strut traction, and interference with strut traction (i.e. stent deformation) were observed as follows: 17/20, 3/20, and 0/20 in PressureWire X; 19/20, 1/20, and 0/20 in Comet; 8/20, 10/20, and 2/20 in OptoWire; and 13/20, 2/20, and 5/20 in Verrata, respectively (p for any differences: <0.001). Visually identifiable major stent deformation was observed once in OptoWire due to the deep concave sensor window and twice in Verrata due to the proximal gap between the sensor and coiled-wire. CONCLUSIONS: PW-pullback in the main-branch after side-branch ostial stenting should be carefully performed to avoid stent deformation. Consideration on the specific mechanical features of the PW is also essential.

Minimally invasive percutaneous transluminal renal artery stenting.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive percutaneous transluminal renal artery stenting (MIPTRS) is a method that prevents complications to the greatest extent possible. The present study aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of MIPTRS performed in cases of renal artery stenosis with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)≤45mL/min. METHODS: Cases of patients who underwent MIPTRS at our hospital between December 2010 and June 2015 in whom eGFR was ≤45mL/min were retrospectively analysed. MIPTRS was performed as follows: 1) using a 4Fr sheathless guiding catheter in a trans-radial approach and 2) using a guiding catheter non-touch technique. The amount of contrast agent used was maintained at ≤10mL with 3) carbon dioxide enhancement and 4) intravascular ultrasound guide stenting, and 5) a distal protection device was used. RESULTS: MIPTRS was performed in 22 patients (32 lesions). The pre-MIPTRS creatinine level and eGFR were 2.01±0.88mg/dL and 29.2±9.0mL/min/1.73m2, respectively. On postoperative day 2, they were 1.78±0.73mg/dL and 35.1±12.3mL/min/1.73m2; at 1month after the procedure, they were 1.80±0.74mg/dL and 33.3±12.3mL/min/1.73m2. Creatinine level did not change significantly, but eGFR was significantly elevated after versus before the procedure, both 2days later (p<0.01) and 1month later (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrated the usefulness of MIPTRS for protecting renal function. This method can be safely used in patients with decreased renal function.