Dataset Information

Real-time magnetic resonance imaging-guided stenting of aortic coarctation with commercially available catheter devices in Swine.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Real-time MR imaging (rtMRI) is now technically capable of guiding catheter-based cardiovascular interventions. Compared with x-ray, rtMRI offers superior tissue imaging in any orientation without ionizing radiation. Translation to clinical trials has awaited the availability of clinical-grade catheter devices that are both MRI visible and safe. We report a preclinical safety and feasibility study of rtMRI-guided stenting in a porcine model of aortic coarctation using only commercially available catheter devices. METHOD AND RESULTS:Coarctation stenting was performed wholly under rtMRI guidance in 13 swine. rtMRI permitted procedure planning, device tracking, and accurate stent deployment. "Active" guidewires, incorporating MRI antennas, improved device visualization compared with unmodified "passive" nitinol guidewires and shortened procedure time (26+/-11 versus 106+/-42 minutes; P=0.008). Follow-up catheterization and necropsy showed accurate stent deployment, durable gradient reduction, and appropriate neointimal formation. MRI immediately identified aortic rupture when oversized devices were tested. CONCLUSIONS:This experience demonstrates preclinical safety and feasibility of rtMRI-guided aortic coarctation stenting using commercially available catheter devices. Patients may benefit from rtMRI in the future because of combined device and tissue imaging, freedom from ionizing radiation, and the ability to identify serious complications promptly.

SUBMITTER: Raval AN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1513629 | biostudies-literature | 2005 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Real-time magnetic resonance imaging-guided stenting of aortic coarctation with commercially available catheter devices in Swine.

Raval Amish N AN Telep James D JD Guttman Michael A MA Ozturk Cengizhan C Jones Michael M Thompson Richard B RB Wright Victor J VJ Schenke William H WH DeSilva Ranil R Aviles Ronnier J RJ Raman Venkatesh K VK Slack Michael C MC Lederman Robert J RJ

Circulation 20050725 5

<h4>Background</h4>Real-time MR imaging (rtMRI) is now technically capable of guiding catheter-based cardiovascular interventions. Compared with x-ray, rtMRI offers superior tissue imaging in any orientation without ionizing radiation. Translation to clinical trials has awaited the availability of clinical-grade catheter devices that are both MRI visible and safe. We report a preclinical safety and feasibility study of rtMRI-guided stenting in a porcine model of aortic coarctation using only com ...[more]

PMID: 16043639

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunity Paramedics (CPs) require access to timely blood analysis in the field to guide treatment and transport decisions. Point of care testing (POCT), as opposed to laboratory analysis, may offer a solution, but limited research exists on CP POCT. The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of two devices (Abbott i-STAT® and Alere epoc®) by CPs in the community.MethodsIn a CP programme responding to 6000 annual patient care events, a split sample validation of POCT against traditional laboratory analysis for seven analytes (sodium, potassium, chloride, creatinine, hemoglobin, hematocrit, and glucose) was conducted on a consecutive sample of patients. The difference of proportion of discrepant results between POCT and laboratory was compared using a two sample proportion test. Usability was analysed by survey of CP experience, a linear mixed effects model of Systems Usability Scale (SUS) adjusted for CP clinical and POCT experience, an expert heuristic evaluation of devices, a review of device-logged errors, and coded observations of POCT use during quality control testing.ResultsOf 1649 episodes of care screened for enrollment, 174 required a blood draw, with 108 episodes (62.1%) enrolled from 73 participants. Participants had a mean age of 58.7 years (SD16.3); 49% were female. In 4 of 646 (0.6%) comparisons, POCT reported a critical value but the laboratory did not; with no statistically significant (p = 0.323) difference between i-STAT® (0.9%;95%CI:0.0,1.9%) compared with epoc® (0.3%;95%CI:0.0,0.9%). There were no instances of the laboratory reporting a critical value when POCT did not. In 88 of 1046 (8.4%) comparisons the a priori defined acceptable difference between POCT and the laboratory was exceeded; occurring more often in epoc® (10.7%;95%CI:8.1,13.3%) compared with i-STAT® (6.1%;95%CI:4.1,8.2%)(p = 0.007). Eighteen of 19 CP surveys were returned, with 11/18 (61.1%) preferring i-STAT® over epoc®. The i-STAT® had a higher mean SUS score (higher usability) compared with epoc® (84.0/100 vs. 59.6/100; p = 0.011). There were no statistically significant differences in device logged errors between i-STAT® and epoc® (p = 0.063).ConclusionsCP programmes can expect clinically valid results from POCT. Device usability assessments should be considered with any local implementation as the two POCT systems have different strengths.

Project description:BackgroundMonitoring resistance training has a range of unique difficulties due to differences in physical characteristics and capacity between athletes, and the indoor environment in which it often occurs. Traditionally, methods such as volume load have been used, but these have inherent flaws. In recent times, numerous portable and affordable devices have been made available that purport to accurately and reliably measure kinetic and kinematic outputs, potentially offering practitioners a means of measuring resistance training loads with confidence. However, a thorough and systematic review of the literature describing the reliability and validity of these devices has yet to be undertaken, which may lead to uncertainty from practitioners on the utility of these devices.ObjectiveA systematic review of studies that investigate the validity and/or reliability of commercially available devices that quantify kinetic and kinematic outputs during resistance training.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, a systematic search of SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, and Medline was performed; studies included were (1) original research investigations; (2) full-text articles written in English; (3) published in a peer-reviewed academic journal; and (4) assessed the validity and/or reliability of commercially available portable devices that quantify resistance training exercises.ResultsA total of 129 studies were retrieved, of which 47 were duplicates. The titles and abstracts of 82 studies were screened and the full text of 40 manuscripts were assessed. A total of 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Additional 13 studies, identified via reference list assessment, were included. Therefore, a total of 44 studies were included in this review.ConclusionMost of the studies within this review did not utilise a gold-standard criterion measure when assessing validity. This has likely led to under or overreporting of error for certain devices. Furthermore, studies that have quantified intra-device reliability have often failed to distinguish between technological and biological variability which has likely altered the true precision of each device. However, it appears linear transducers which have greater accuracy and reliability compared to other forms of device. Future research should endeavour to utilise gold-standard criterion measures across a broader range of exercises (including weightlifting movements) and relative loads.

Dataset Information

Real-time magnetic resonance imaging-guided stenting of aortic coarctation with commercially available catheter devices in Swine.

Publications

Real-time magnetic resonance imaging-guided stenting of aortic coarctation with commercially available catheter devices in Swine.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets