TY - JOUR
T1 - Simplification of balloon-occluded retrograde transcatheter obliteration procedure using a coaxial double balloon catheter compared with a single-balloon catheter
AU - Ishizu, Yoji
AU - Ishigami, Masatoshi
AU - Honda, Takashi
AU - Kuzuya, Teiji
AU - Ito, Takanori
AU - Komada, Tomohiro
AU - Fujishiro, Mitsuhiro
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020, Japan Radiological Society.
PY - 2021/3
Y1 - 2021/3
N2 - Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of a coaxial double balloon catheter for simplification of the balloon-occluded retrograde transcatheter obliteration (BRTO) procedure compared with a single-balloon catheter. Materials and methods: Thirty-three patients who underwent BRTO with a single-balloon catheter (Single-balloon group, n = 15) or a coaxial double balloon catheter (Coaxial group, n = 18) were included, retrospectively. The frequency of additional procedures for stagnation of sclerosant including ethanol injection, coil embolization, and additional balloon occlusion for collateral draining veins; the dose of ethanolamine oleate (EO); and the complication rate and the success rate of sclerosant stagnation were evaluated. Results: Additional procedures were needed in four patients in the Coaxial group, which was significantly lower than that in the Single-balloon group (nine patients, P = 0.038). The dose of EO in the Coaxial group (11.2 ± 6.6 g) was lower, but not significantly different than that in the Single-balloon group (14.4 g ± 6.1 g, P = 0.184). The complication rate and the success rate of sclerosant stagnation were not different between the two groups. Conclusion: The use of a coaxial double balloon catheter can simplify the BRTO procedure compared with a single-balloon catheter.
AB - Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of a coaxial double balloon catheter for simplification of the balloon-occluded retrograde transcatheter obliteration (BRTO) procedure compared with a single-balloon catheter. Materials and methods: Thirty-three patients who underwent BRTO with a single-balloon catheter (Single-balloon group, n = 15) or a coaxial double balloon catheter (Coaxial group, n = 18) were included, retrospectively. The frequency of additional procedures for stagnation of sclerosant including ethanol injection, coil embolization, and additional balloon occlusion for collateral draining veins; the dose of ethanolamine oleate (EO); and the complication rate and the success rate of sclerosant stagnation were evaluated. Results: Additional procedures were needed in four patients in the Coaxial group, which was significantly lower than that in the Single-balloon group (nine patients, P = 0.038). The dose of EO in the Coaxial group (11.2 ± 6.6 g) was lower, but not significantly different than that in the Single-balloon group (14.4 g ± 6.1 g, P = 0.184). The complication rate and the success rate of sclerosant stagnation were not different between the two groups. Conclusion: The use of a coaxial double balloon catheter can simplify the BRTO procedure compared with a single-balloon catheter.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094850279&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85094850279&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11604-020-01060-x
DO - 10.1007/s11604-020-01060-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 33128698
AN - SCOPUS:85094850279
SN - 1867-1071
VL - 39
SP - 296
EP - 302
JO - Japanese journal of radiology
JF - Japanese journal of radiology
IS - 3
ER -