The New Carotid Braided Stent CASPERTM RX. Single center experience in 50 cases

Main Article Content

Cabral de Andrade G*
Lesczynski A
Clímaco VM
Pereira ER

Abstract



Purpose: Carotid stenosis, as well as dissections and pseudo dissecting aneurysms are etiological factors of Ischemic stroke. A new braided double-layer Nickel titanium Stent CASPERTMRX has super elasticity, shape-memory properties, combined with re-sheathable and repositionable, improving placement accuracy in a closed cell with flow diversion capability. To evaluate in clinical implant behavicor of in many different pathologies.


Materials and methods: It was implanted 53 CASPER-RX stents in 50 lesions (average age of 67 years; 29 men and 21 women) in different pathologies, high-grade symptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis in 43(86%) patients; and dissection in 7(4%) being: 4 dissecting pseudo aneurysms, 2 sub endothelial spontaneous dissections and 1 sub endothelial iatrogenic dissection. In all patients we used dual antiplatelet therapy, before treatment.


Results: Technical success achieved in all patients and complication rate (4%) and a 0% rate of neurological complications at 30 days. No stroke minor or restenosis after 6 months ultrasound or CT Scan examination FU.


Conclusion: CASPER™RX Stent conforms to tortuous anatomy, good wall apposition and a good conformation in tapered ICA-CCA segments in re sheathable delivery system. The very closed cells have a good result as a flow diverter. Technical success was achieved in all patients without clinical complications. However, we need long-term follow up to better assess the efficiency of this new device.



Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

G, C. de A., A, L., VM, C., & ER, P. (2020). The New Carotid Braided Stent CASPERTM RX. Single center experience in 50 cases. Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiology, 7(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.17352/2455-2976.000127
Research Articles

Copyright (c) 2020 Cabral de Andrade G, et al.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Licensing and protecting the author rights is the central aim and core of the publishing business. Peertechz dedicates itself in making it easier for people to share and build upon the work of others while maintaining consistency with the rules of copyright. Peertechz licensing terms are formulated to facilitate reuse of the manuscripts published in journals to take maximum advantage of Open Access publication and for the purpose of disseminating knowledge.

We support 'libre' open access, which defines Open Access in true terms as free of charge online access along with usage rights. The usage rights are granted through the use of specific Creative Commons license.

Peertechz accomplice with- [CC BY 4.0]

Explanation

'CC' stands for Creative Commons license. 'BY' symbolizes that users have provided attribution to the creator that the published manuscripts can be used or shared. This license allows for redistribution, commercial and non-commercial, as long as it is passed along unchanged and in whole, with credit to the author.

Please take in notification that Creative Commons user licenses are non-revocable. We recommend authors to check if their funding body requires a specific license.

With this license, the authors are allowed that after publishing with Peertechz, they can share their research by posting a free draft copy of their article to any repository or website.
'CC BY' license observance:

License Name

Permission to read and download

Permission to display in a repository

Permission to translate

Commercial uses of manuscript

CC BY 4.0

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

The authors please note that Creative Commons license is focused on making creative works available for discovery and reuse. Creative Commons licenses provide an alternative to standard copyrights, allowing authors to specify ways that their works can be used without having to grant permission for each individual request. Others who want to reserve all of their rights under copyright law should not use CC licenses.

Bosiers M, Deloose K, Verbist J, Peeters P (2005) Carotid artery stenting: which stent for which lesion? Vascular 13: 205-210. Link: https://bit.ly/2yR9SaR

Nikas DN, Kompara G, Reimers B (2011) Carotid stents: which is the best option? J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 52: 779-793. Link: https://bit.ly/35Tk9iO

Müller-Hülsbeck S, Schäfer PJ, Charalambous N, Schaffner SR, Heller M, et al. (2009) Comparison of carotid stents: an in-vitro experiment focusing on stent design. J Endovasc Ther 16: 168-177. Link: https://bit.ly/3buaY9A

North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) Collaborators. Barnett HJM, Taylor DW, Haynes RB, Sackett DL, et al. (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterec-tomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 325: 445-453.Link: https://bit.ly/2yPSSBG

Cremonesi A, Castriota F, Secco GG, Macdonald S, Roffi M (2015) Carotid artery stenting: an update. Eur Heart J. 36: 13-21. Link: https://bit.ly/3cES15q

Piorkowski M, Kläffling C, Botsios S, Zerweck C, Scheinert S, et al. (2015) Postinterventional microembolism signals detected by transcranial Doppler ultrasound after carotid artery stenting. Vasa 44: 49-57. Link: https://bit.ly/2SViHav

Touzé E, Gauvrit JY, Meder JF, Mas JL (2005) Prognosis of cervical artery dissection. Front Neurol Neurosci 20: 129-139. Link: https://bit.ly/2TgT8B1

Kennedy F, Lanfranconi S, Hicks C, Reid J, Gompertz P, et al. (2012) Antiplatelets vs anticoagulation for dissection: CADISS nonrandomized arm andmeta-analysis. Neurology 79: 686-689.Link: https://bit.ly/2WsxJ9W

Donas KP, Mayer D, Guber I, Baumgartner R, Genoni M, et al. (2008) Endovascular repair of extracranial carotid artery dissection: current status and level of evidence. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19: 1693-1698. Link: https://bit.ly/2zw1D3W

Biondi A, Katz JM, Vallabh J, Segal AZ, Gobin YP (2005) Progressive symptomatic carotid dissection treated with multiple stents. Stroke 36: e80-e82. Link: https://bit.ly/2Ah3wlk

Ohta H, Natarajan SK, Hauck EF, Khalessi AA, Siddiqui AH, et al. (2011) Endovascular stent therapy for extracranial and intracranial carotid artery dissection: single-center experience. J Neurosurg 115: 91-100. Link: https://bit.ly/3fJotFY

Pham MH, Rahme RJ, Arnaout O, Hurley MC, Bernstein RA, et al. (2011) Endovascular stenting of extracranial carotid and vertebral artery dissections: a systematic review of the literature. Neurosurgery. 68: 856-866. Link: https://bit.ly/2YXr1KA

Li Z, Chang G, Yao C, Guo L, Liu Y, et al. (2011) Endovascular stenting of extracranial carotid artery aneurysm: a systematic review. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 42: 419-426. Link: https://bit.ly/2zBrG9L

Maras D, Lioupis C, Magoufis G, Tsamopoulos N, Moulakakis K, et al. (2006) Covered stent-graft treatment of traumatic internal carotid artery pseudoaneurysms: a review. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 29: 958-968. Link: https://bit.ly/3fJmoJY

Welleweerd JC, Jan de Borst G, de Groot D, van Herwaarden JA, Lo RT, et al. (2015) Bare metal stents for treatment of extracranial internal carotid artery aneurysms: long term results. J Endovasc Ther 22: 130-134. Link: https://bit.ly/3dDBEq0

Bosiers M, De Donato G, Deloose K, Verbist J, Peeters P, et al. (2007) Does free cell area influence the outcome in carotid artery stenting? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 33: 135-141.Link: https://bit.ly/2T0FCBe

Hart JP, Peeters P, Verbist J, Deloose K, Bosiers M (2006) Do device characteristics impact outcome in carotid artery stenting? J Vasc Surg 44: 725-730. Link: https://bit.ly/3dMq641

Tadros RO, Spyris CT, Vouyouka AG, Chung C, Krishnan P, et al. (2012) Comparing the embolic potential of open and closed cell stents during carotid angioplasty and stenting. J Vasc Surg 56: 89-95. Link: https://bit.ly/2WQSGtV

Hopf-Jensen S, Marques L, Preiß M, Müller-Hülsbeck S (2015) Initial Clinical Experience With the Micromesh Roadsaver Carotid Artery Stent for the Treatment of Patients With Symptomatic Carotid Artery Disease. J Endovasc Ther 22: 220-225. Link: https://bit.ly/2T041GV

Timaran CH, Rosero EB, Higuera A, Ilarraza A, Modrall JG, et al. (2011) Randomized clinical trial of open-cell vs closed-cell stents for carotid stenting and effects of stent design on cerebral embolization. J Vasc Surg 54: 1310-1316. Link: https://bit.ly/3bnz9GJ

Wissgott C, Schmidt W, Brandt C, Behrens P, AndresenR (2015) Preliminary Clinical Results and Mechanical Behavior of a New Double-Layer Carotid Stent. J Endovasc Ther 22: 634-639. Link: https://bit.ly/2SZzjxS

Kabbasch C, Bangard C, Liebig T, Majd P, Mpotsaris A, et al. (2016) The Dual Layer Casper Micromesh Stent: Taking Advantage of Flow-Diverting Capabilities for the Treatment of Extracranial Aneurysms and Pseudoaneurysms. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 39: 472-476. Link: https://bit.ly/2T0xqRD