Pediatric Cardiology

, Volume 37, Issue 6, pp 1141–1147 | Cite as

Cerebral Microemboli Detection and Differentiation During Transcatheter Closure of Patent Ductus Arteriosus

  • Sean WallaceEmail author
  • Gaute Døhlen
  • Henrik Holmstrøm
  • Christian Lund
  • David Russell
Original Article


The aim of this prospective study was to determine the frequency and composition of cerebral microemboli in a pediatric population, during transcatheter closure of patent ductus arteriosus (PDA). Multifrequency transcranial Doppler was used to monitor cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) and detect microembolic signals (MES) in the middle cerebral artery in 23 patients (median age 18 months). MES were automatically identified and differentiated according to composition; gaseous or solid. The procedure was divided into five periods: Arterial catheterization; venous catheterization; ductal catheterization; angiography; device placement and release. Timing of catheter manipulations and MES were registered and compared. MES were detected in all patients. The median number of signals was 7, (minimum 1, maximum 28). Over 95 % of all MES were gaseous. 11 % were detected during device placement while 64 % were detected during angiographic studies, significantly higher than during any other period (P < 0.001). There was a moderate correlation between the number of MES and volume of contrast used, (R = 0.622, P < 0.01). There was no correlation with fluoroscopic time or duration of procedure. This is the first study to investigate the timing and composition of cerebral microemboli during PDA occlusion. Microemboli were related to specific catheter manipulations and correlated with the amount of contrast used.


Patent ductus arteriosus Interventional catheterization Transcranial Doppler Systemic emboli 



Dr. Wallace received a research Grant from the Norwegian Foundation for Health and Rehabilitation.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Gournay V (2011) The ductus arteriosus: physiology, regulation, and functional and congenital anomalies. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 104(11):578–585CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Park YA et al (2010) Clinical outcome of transcatheter closure of patent ductus arteriosus in small children weighing 10 kg or less. Korean J Pediatr 53(12):1012–1017CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rao PS (2001) Summary and comparison of patent ductus arteriosus closure devices. Curr Interv Cardiol Rep 3(3):268–274PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Masura J et al (2006) Long-term outcome of transcatheter patent ductus arteriosus closure using Amplatzer duct occluders. Am Heart J 151(3):755 e7–755 e10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Magee AG et al (2001) Transcatheter coil occlusion of the arterial duct; results of the European registry. Eur Heart J 22(19):1817–1821CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamon M et al (2012) Silent cerebral infarcts after cardiac catheterization: a randomized comparison of radial and femoral approaches. Am Heart J 164(4):449–454CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Itoh S et al (2011) Microembolic signals measured by transcranial Doppler during transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect using the Amplatzer septal occluder. Cardiol Young 21(2):182–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wallace S et al (2015) Cerebral microemboli detection and differentiation during transcatheter closure of atrial septal defect in a paediatric population. Cardiol Young 25(2):237–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rodriguez RA et al (1999) Cerebral blood flow velocity during occlusive manipulation of patent ductus arteriosus in children. J Neuroimaging 9(1):23–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bissonnette B, Benson LN (1998) Closure of persistently patent arterial duct and its impact on cerebral circulatory haemodynamics in children. Can J Anaesth 45(3):199–205CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Russell D, Brucher R (2002) Online automatic discrimination between solid and gaseous cerebral microemboli with the first multifrequency transcranial Doppler. Stroke 33(8):1975–1980CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brucher R, Russell D (2002) Automatic online embolus detection and artifact rejection with the first multifrequency transcranial Doppler. Stroke 33(8):1969–1974CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Russell D, Brucher R (2005) Embolus detection and differentiation using multifrequency transcranial Doppler. Stroke 36(4):706CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lund C et al (2005) Cerebral emboli during left heart catheterization may cause acute brain injury. Eur Heart J 26(13):1269–1275CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Leclercq F et al (2001) Transcranial Doppler detection of cerebral microemboli during left heart catheterization. Cerebrovasc Dis 12(1):59–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bladin CF et al (1998) Transcranial Doppler detection of microemboli during percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Stroke 29(11):2367–2370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Busing KA et al (2005) Cerebral infarction: incidence and risk factors after diagnostic and interventional cardiac catheterization–prospective evaluation at diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 235(1):177–183CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Francis E et al (2010) Transcatheter occlusion of patent ductus arteriosus in pre-term infants. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 3(5):550–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kumar RK et al (2004) Bioptome-assisted coil occlusion of moderate-large patent ductus arteriosus in infants and small children. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 62(2):266–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ferrari J et al (2004) Cerebral microembolism during transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale. J Neurol 251(7):825–829CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Morandi E et al (2006) Silent brain embolism during transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale: a transcranial Doppler study. Neurol Sci 27(5):328–331CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Braekken SK et al (1998) Influence of guidewire and catheter type on the frequency of cerebral microembolic signals during left heart catheterization. Am J Cardiol 82(5):632–637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hamon M et al (2006) Cerebral microembolism during cardiac catheterization and risk of acute brain injury: a prospective diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging study. Stroke 37(8):2035–2038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Scott DA et al (2014) Cognitive dysfunction follows left heart catheterisation but is not related to microembolic count. Int J Cardiol 175(1):67–71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kruis RW, Vlasveld FA, Van Dijk D (2010) The (un)importance of cerebral microemboli. Semin Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 14(2):111–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lund C et al (2005) Cerebral ischemic injury and cognitive impairment after off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 80(6):2126–2131CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Skjelland M et al (2009) Cerebral microemboli and brain injury during carotid artery endarterectomy and stenting. Stroke 40(1):230–234CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Banahan C et al (2014) An in vitro comparison of embolus differentiation techniques for clinically significant macroemboli: dual-frequency technique versus frequency modulation method. Ultrasound Med Biol 40(11):2642–2654CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russell D, Brucher R (2006) Embolus detection and differentiation using multifrequency transcranial Doppler. Stroke 37(2):340–341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Paediatric CardiologyRikshospitaletOsloNorway
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyRikshospitaletOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations