Journal of Neurointerventional Surgery | 2019

Intrathrombus polymer coating deposition: a pilot study of 91 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for acute large vessel stroke. Part I: Histologic frequency

 
 
 
 
 

Abstract


Background Polymer coating embolism due to vascular medical device use is an increasingly recognized iatrogenic complication. This phenomenon has been linked with various adverse effects including neuroinflammation, acute ischemic stroke, cerebral hemorrhage, and death. Notably, procedure- and device-specific risks of this complication are poorly investigated. In this study, we evaluate the detectable frequency of intra-arterial polymer coating delamination among patients who underwent endovascular thrombectomy for treatment of acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion. Methods Ninety-two cerebral thrombectomy specimens were retrospectively analyzed for the presence of polymer coating particulates. Histologic findings were correlated with demographic and procedural details and patient outcomes. Results Evidence of polymer coating deposition was found in 30 of 92 extracted thrombi (33%). No correlation between intrathrombus polymer deposition and use of a specific thrombectomy device such as a stent retriever, aspiration catheter, or guide catheter was found. However, heterogeneous patterns of device use suggest a number of culprit devices. A trend toward longer procedure times and multiple thrombectomy passes was noted in positive cases. Intrathrombus polymer deposition was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes as measured by the 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS); however, small sample size and follow-up intervals limit interpretation. Ninety-day outcomes based on mRS may not fully capture the clinical effects of acute and/or delayed intracerebral polymer complications. Conclusion In light of documented adverse neurologic effects, the frequency of intrathrombus polymer particulates indicates the need for consensus testing methods and large-scale long-term prospective clinical device trials, with inclusion of relevant endpoints to better assess biomaterial and device risks to patients.

Volume 11
Pages 1191 - 1196
DOI 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014684
Language English
Journal Journal of Neurointerventional Surgery

Full Text