Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters

David F Kallmes, J. Kevin McGraw, Avery J. Evans, John M. Mathis, Robert W. Hergenrother, Mary E. Jensen, Harry J. Cloft, Mariabeatriz Lopes, Jacques E. Dion

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess in a swine model the in vivo thrombogenicity of various microcatheters and guiding catheters as a function of catheter material, catheter coating, and duration of implantation. METHODS: Microcatheters (Tracker 18 and Fastracker 18, Target Therapeutics, Fremont, Calif; Magic 1.8, Bait, Montmorency, France; and Transit, Cordis Endovascular Systems, Miami Lakes, Fla) were placed through 6F guiding catheters (Fasguide, Target Therapeutics, and Envoy, Cordis Endovascular Systems) into the common carotid arteries of swine for 30 minutes (short term), 90 minutes (medium term), and 35 days (long term). Guiding catheters were implanted for 5 hours. At the end of the implantation periods the catheters were retracted and fixed for scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The surface of the Fastracker microcatheter was devoid of debris after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Tracker microcatheter had minimal accumulation of cellular elements whereas the Transit microcatheter showed moderate accumulation of nondeformed red blood cells. Neither the Tracker nor the Transit microcatheter showed evidence of increasing debris accumulation after medium-term implantation as compared with short-term implantation. The Magic microcatheter was coated with gross thrombus after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Fasguide guiding catheter was nearly devoid of debris, while the Envoy guiding catheter had moderate thrombus formation. Long-term implantation of the Fastracker microcatheter was well tolerated whereas that of the Transit catheter resulted in vessel occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters are less thrombogenic than their nonhydrophilic counterparts, but not all hydrophilic coatings are equally hypothrombogenic. Degree of thrombogenicity depends on catheter material rather than surface morphology. Medium-term implantation did not yield increasing thrombus formation relative to short-term implantation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1243-1251
Number of pages9
JournalAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology
Volume18
Issue number7
StatePublished - Aug 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Catheters
Magic
Thrombosis
Swine
Common Carotid Artery
Lakes
Electron Scanning Microscopy
France
Erythrocytes
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Animal studies
  • Catheters and catheterization
  • Instruments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Kallmes, D. F., McGraw, J. K., Evans, A. J., Mathis, J. M., Hergenrother, R. W., Jensen, M. E., ... Dion, J. E. (1997). Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 18(7), 1243-1251.

Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters. / Kallmes, David F; McGraw, J. Kevin; Evans, Avery J.; Mathis, John M.; Hergenrother, Robert W.; Jensen, Mary E.; Cloft, Harry J.; Lopes, Mariabeatriz; Dion, Jacques E.

In: American Journal of Neuroradiology, Vol. 18, No. 7, 08.1997, p. 1243-1251.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kallmes, DF, McGraw, JK, Evans, AJ, Mathis, JM, Hergenrother, RW, Jensen, ME, Cloft, HJ, Lopes, M & Dion, JE 1997, 'Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters', American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 1243-1251.
Kallmes DF, McGraw JK, Evans AJ, Mathis JM, Hergenrother RW, Jensen ME et al. Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters. American Journal of Neuroradiology. 1997 Aug;18(7):1243-1251.
Kallmes, David F ; McGraw, J. Kevin ; Evans, Avery J. ; Mathis, John M. ; Hergenrother, Robert W. ; Jensen, Mary E. ; Cloft, Harry J. ; Lopes, Mariabeatriz ; Dion, Jacques E. / Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters. In: American Journal of Neuroradiology. 1997 ; Vol. 18, No. 7. pp. 1243-1251.
@article{fb3f7c9a664d4c9d9ed19816681c45a0,
title = "Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters",
abstract = "PURPOSE: To assess in a swine model the in vivo thrombogenicity of various microcatheters and guiding catheters as a function of catheter material, catheter coating, and duration of implantation. METHODS: Microcatheters (Tracker 18 and Fastracker 18, Target Therapeutics, Fremont, Calif; Magic 1.8, Bait, Montmorency, France; and Transit, Cordis Endovascular Systems, Miami Lakes, Fla) were placed through 6F guiding catheters (Fasguide, Target Therapeutics, and Envoy, Cordis Endovascular Systems) into the common carotid arteries of swine for 30 minutes (short term), 90 minutes (medium term), and 35 days (long term). Guiding catheters were implanted for 5 hours. At the end of the implantation periods the catheters were retracted and fixed for scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The surface of the Fastracker microcatheter was devoid of debris after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Tracker microcatheter had minimal accumulation of cellular elements whereas the Transit microcatheter showed moderate accumulation of nondeformed red blood cells. Neither the Tracker nor the Transit microcatheter showed evidence of increasing debris accumulation after medium-term implantation as compared with short-term implantation. The Magic microcatheter was coated with gross thrombus after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Fasguide guiding catheter was nearly devoid of debris, while the Envoy guiding catheter had moderate thrombus formation. Long-term implantation of the Fastracker microcatheter was well tolerated whereas that of the Transit catheter resulted in vessel occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters are less thrombogenic than their nonhydrophilic counterparts, but not all hydrophilic coatings are equally hypothrombogenic. Degree of thrombogenicity depends on catheter material rather than surface morphology. Medium-term implantation did not yield increasing thrombus formation relative to short-term implantation.",
keywords = "Animal studies, Catheters and catheterization, Instruments",
author = "Kallmes, {David F} and McGraw, {J. Kevin} and Evans, {Avery J.} and Mathis, {John M.} and Hergenrother, {Robert W.} and Jensen, {Mary E.} and Cloft, {Harry J.} and Mariabeatriz Lopes and Dion, {Jacques E.}",
year = "1997",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "1243--1251",
journal = "American Journal of Neuroradiology",
issn = "0195-6108",
publisher = "American Society of Neuroradiology",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Thrombogenicity of hydrophilic and nonhydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters

AU - Kallmes, David F

AU - McGraw, J. Kevin

AU - Evans, Avery J.

AU - Mathis, John M.

AU - Hergenrother, Robert W.

AU - Jensen, Mary E.

AU - Cloft, Harry J.

AU - Lopes, Mariabeatriz

AU - Dion, Jacques E.

PY - 1997/8

Y1 - 1997/8

N2 - PURPOSE: To assess in a swine model the in vivo thrombogenicity of various microcatheters and guiding catheters as a function of catheter material, catheter coating, and duration of implantation. METHODS: Microcatheters (Tracker 18 and Fastracker 18, Target Therapeutics, Fremont, Calif; Magic 1.8, Bait, Montmorency, France; and Transit, Cordis Endovascular Systems, Miami Lakes, Fla) were placed through 6F guiding catheters (Fasguide, Target Therapeutics, and Envoy, Cordis Endovascular Systems) into the common carotid arteries of swine for 30 minutes (short term), 90 minutes (medium term), and 35 days (long term). Guiding catheters were implanted for 5 hours. At the end of the implantation periods the catheters were retracted and fixed for scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The surface of the Fastracker microcatheter was devoid of debris after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Tracker microcatheter had minimal accumulation of cellular elements whereas the Transit microcatheter showed moderate accumulation of nondeformed red blood cells. Neither the Tracker nor the Transit microcatheter showed evidence of increasing debris accumulation after medium-term implantation as compared with short-term implantation. The Magic microcatheter was coated with gross thrombus after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Fasguide guiding catheter was nearly devoid of debris, while the Envoy guiding catheter had moderate thrombus formation. Long-term implantation of the Fastracker microcatheter was well tolerated whereas that of the Transit catheter resulted in vessel occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters are less thrombogenic than their nonhydrophilic counterparts, but not all hydrophilic coatings are equally hypothrombogenic. Degree of thrombogenicity depends on catheter material rather than surface morphology. Medium-term implantation did not yield increasing thrombus formation relative to short-term implantation.

AB - PURPOSE: To assess in a swine model the in vivo thrombogenicity of various microcatheters and guiding catheters as a function of catheter material, catheter coating, and duration of implantation. METHODS: Microcatheters (Tracker 18 and Fastracker 18, Target Therapeutics, Fremont, Calif; Magic 1.8, Bait, Montmorency, France; and Transit, Cordis Endovascular Systems, Miami Lakes, Fla) were placed through 6F guiding catheters (Fasguide, Target Therapeutics, and Envoy, Cordis Endovascular Systems) into the common carotid arteries of swine for 30 minutes (short term), 90 minutes (medium term), and 35 days (long term). Guiding catheters were implanted for 5 hours. At the end of the implantation periods the catheters were retracted and fixed for scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The surface of the Fastracker microcatheter was devoid of debris after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Tracker microcatheter had minimal accumulation of cellular elements whereas the Transit microcatheter showed moderate accumulation of nondeformed red blood cells. Neither the Tracker nor the Transit microcatheter showed evidence of increasing debris accumulation after medium-term implantation as compared with short-term implantation. The Magic microcatheter was coated with gross thrombus after both short- and medium- term implantation. The Fasguide guiding catheter was nearly devoid of debris, while the Envoy guiding catheter had moderate thrombus formation. Long-term implantation of the Fastracker microcatheter was well tolerated whereas that of the Transit catheter resulted in vessel occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrophilic microcatheters and guiding catheters are less thrombogenic than their nonhydrophilic counterparts, but not all hydrophilic coatings are equally hypothrombogenic. Degree of thrombogenicity depends on catheter material rather than surface morphology. Medium-term implantation did not yield increasing thrombus formation relative to short-term implantation.

KW - Animal studies

KW - Catheters and catheterization

KW - Instruments

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0031545996&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0031545996&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 9282849

AN - SCOPUS:0031545996

VL - 18

SP - 1243

EP - 1251

JO - American Journal of Neuroradiology

JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology

SN - 0195-6108

IS - 7

ER -