CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 389–395 | Cite as

MVP™ Micro Vascular Plug Systems for the Treatment of Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations

  • Christopher R. Bailey
  • Anirudh Arun
  • Matthew Towsley
  • Won Kyu Choi
  • Joshua F. Betz
  • Stacey MacKenzie
  • Moustafa Abou Areda
  • Madhavi Duvvuri
  • Sally Mitchell
  • Clifford R. WeissEmail author
Clinical Investigation Arterial Interventions
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Arterial Interventions



To describe our institutional experience with MVP™ micro vascular plug systems for the treatment of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations (PAVMs).

Materials and Methods

We performed a retrospective medical record review of 52 patients with 119 PAVMs treated exclusively with MVP™ systems (69 procedures/153 MVP™ systems) between July 2014 and July 2018. All patients had PAVMs with feeding artery diameters ≥ 2 mm. MVP™ systems were deployed according to physician preference. We collected patient demographic information; procedural data (including size of feeding artery, size and number of embolics used per PAVM, fluoroscopy time, contrast administration), technical success rates, complications, and persistence. Persistence was assessed using computed tomography angiography (CTA) performed 1–3 months and 3–5 years after embolization per clinical protocol.


All procedures were technically successful without major complications. Mean feeding artery diameter was 3.3 ± 1.2 mm. Mean fluoroscopy time per procedure and contrast volume administered per procedure were 35 ± 16 min and 217 ± 101 mL, respectively. A mean of 1.3 ± 0.8 MVP™ systems was used per PAVM. There were no instances of persistence during a mean follow-up time of 328 ± 258 days (range 26 to 914 days).


For PAVMs with feeding artery diameters of 2 to 7.9 mm (mean 3.3 ± 1.2 mm), MVP™ systems are safe and effective given their high technical success rates and lack of persistence. Further prospective work will be required to elucidate the advantages and disadvantages of these MVP™ systems for PAVM embolization.

Level of Evidence

Level III.


Computed tomography angiography Hemorrhagic hereditary telangiectasia MVP™ micro vascular plug system Pulmonary arteriovenous malformation Persistence 



computed tomography


computed tomography angiography


digital subtraction angiography


hemorrhagic hereditary telangiectasia

MVP™ system

MVP™ micro vascular plug system


pulmonary arteriovenous malformation



Medtronic has provided grant support.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Dr. Weiss has received research grants from Medtronic, Siemens Healthcare, Merit Medical, and BTG, and he is a consultant for BTG and Medtronic. Medtronic has provided grant support for this study. A study investigator has received research grants from Siemens Healthcare, Merit Medical, and BTG, and he or she is a consultant for BTG and Medtronic.


  1. 1.
    Garg N, Khunger M, Gupta A, Kumar N. Optimal management of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. J Blood Med. 2014;5:191–206.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pollak JS, Saluja S, Thabet A, et al. Clinical and anatomic outcomes after embolotherapy of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17(1):35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Andersen PE, Kjeldsen AD. Embolization of pulmonary AVMs of feeding arteries less than 3 mm: reports of two cases and an 8-year follow-up without embolization. Acta Radiol Short Rep 2012;1(2):1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Trerotola SO, Pyeritz RE. PAVM embolization: an update. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(4):837–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Faughnan ME, Palda VA, Garcia-Tsao G, et al. International guidelines for the diagnosis and management of hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia. J Med Genet. 2011;48(2):73–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Letourneau-Guillon L, Faughnan ME, Soulez G, et al. Embolization of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations with amplatzer vascular plugs: safety and midterm effectiveness. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2010;21(5):649–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hsu CC, Kwan GN, Thompson SA, et al. Embolisation for pulmonary arteriovenous malformation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;1:CD008017.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hsu CC, Kwan GN, Thompson SA, van Driel ML. Embolisation therapy for pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;5:CD008017.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Milic A, Chan RP, Cohen JH, Faughnan ME. Reperfusion of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations after embolotherapy. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2005;16(12):1675–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shimohira M, Kawai T, Hashizume T, et al. Reperfusion rates of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations after coil embolization: evaluation with time-resolved MR angiography or pulmonary angiography. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015;26(6):856–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trerotola SO, Pyeritz RE. Does use of coils in addition to amplatzer vascular plugs prevent recanalization? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(3):766–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fidelman N, Gordon RL, Bloom AI, et al. Reperfusion of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations after successful embolotherapy with vascular plugs. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19(8):1246–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rabellino M, Serra M, Peralta O, et al. Early experience with the AMPLATZER vascular plug IV for the occlusion of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25(9):1333–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang W, Li H, Tam MD, et al. The amplatzer vascular plug: a review of the device and its clinical applications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(4):725–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rossi M, Rebonato A, Greco L, et al. A new device for vascular embolization: report on case of two pulmonary arteriovenous fistulas embolization using the amplatzer vascular plug. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2006;29(5):902–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pellerin O, Maleux G, Dean C, et al. Microvascular plug: a new embolic material for hepatic arterial skeletonization. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2014;37(6):1597–601.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barrett L, Brown NI, Joseph VP. First use of Micro Vascular Plugs in Australia: endovascular treatment of pulmonary arteriovenous malformation. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2018;62(1):72–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beaty NB, Jindal G, Gandhi D. Micro Vascular Plug (MVP)-assisted vessel occlusion in neurovascular pathologies: technical results and initial clinical experience. J Neurointerv Surg. 2015;7(10):758–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Conrad MB, Ishaque BM, Surman AM, et al. Intraprocedural safety and technical success of the MVP micro vascular plug for embolization of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2015;26(11):1735–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boatta E, Jahn C, Canuet M, et al. Pulmonary arteriovenous malformations embolized using a micro vascular plug system: technical note on a preliminary experience. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017;40(2):296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Woodward CS, Pyeritz RE, Chittams JL, Trerotola SO. Treated pulmonary arteriovenous malformations: patterns of persistence and associated retreatment success. Radiology. 2013;269(3):919–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yasumoto T, Osuga K, Yamamoto H, et al. Long-term outcomes of coil packing for visceral aneurysms: correlation between packing density and incidence of coil compaction or recanalization. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24(12):1798–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Greben CR, Setton A, Putterman D, et al. Pulmonary arteriovenous malformation embolization: how we do it. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;16(1):39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abdel Aal AK, Massoud MO, Elantably DM. Does the type and size of Amplatzer vascular plug affect the occlusion time of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations? Diagn Interv Radiol. 2017;23(1):61–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Andersen PE, Kjeldsen AD. Interventional treatment of pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. World J Radiol. 2010;2(9):339–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sacks D, McClenny TE, Cardella JF, Lewis CA. Society of interventional radiology clinical practice guidelines. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2003;14:S199–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher R. Bailey
    • 1
  • Anirudh Arun
    • 1
  • Matthew Towsley
    • 2
  • Won Kyu Choi
    • 3
  • Joshua F. Betz
    • 4
  • Stacey MacKenzie
    • 2
  • Moustafa Abou Areda
    • 3
  • Madhavi Duvvuri
    • 3
  • Sally Mitchell
    • 2
  • Clifford R. Weiss
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological ScienceThe Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Division of Vascular and Interventional RadiologyThe Johns Hopkins HospitalBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.The Johns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Department of BiostatisticsThe Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations