CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology

, Volume 36, Issue 5, pp 1262–1269 | Cite as

Downstream Hepatic Arterial Blood Pressure Changes Caused by Deployment of the Surefire AntiReflux Expandable Tip

  • Steven C. Rose
  • Steven G. Kikolski
  • James E. Chomas
Clinical Investigation

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this work was to evaluate blood pressure changes caused by deployment of the Surefire antireflux expandable tip. The pressure measurements are relevant because they imply changes in hepatoenteric arterial blood flow within this liver compartment during hepatic artery delivery of cytotoxic agents.

Methods

After positioning the Surefire antireflux system in the targeted hepatic artery, blood pressure was obtained initially with the tip collapsed (or through a femoral artery sheath), then again after the tip was expanded before chemoembolization or yttrium 90 (90Y) radioembolization.

Results

Eighteen patients with liver malignancy underwent 29 procedures in 29 hepatic arteries (3 common hepatic, 22 lobar, 4 segmental). Systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure were all decreased by a mean of 29 mm Hg (p = 0.000004), 14 mm Hg (p = 0.0000004), and 22 mm Hg (p = 0.00000001), respectively.

Conclusion

When the Surefire expandable tip is deployed to prevent retrograde reflux of agents, it also results in a significant decrease in blood pressure in the antegrade distribution, potentially resulting in hepatopedal blood flow in vessels that are difficult to embolize, such as the supraduodenal arteries.

Keywords

Liver cancer Hepatocellular carcinoma Chemoembolization Radioembolization Embolization 

References

  1. 1.
    López-Benítez R, Richter GM, Kauczor H-U et al (2009) Analysis of nontarget embolization mechanisms during embolization and chemoembolization procedures. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 32:615–622PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murthy R, Brown DB, Salem R et al (2007) Gastrointestinal complications associated with hepatic arterial yttrium-90 microsphere therapy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 18:553–562PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Riaz A, Lewandowski RJ, Kulik LM et al (2009) Complications following radioembolization with yttrium-90 microspheres: A comprehensive literature review. J Vasc Interv Radiol 20:1121–1130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kennedy AS, McNeillie P, Dezarn WA et al (2009) Treatment parameters and outcome in 680 treatments of internal radiation with resin 90Y-microspheres for unresectable hepatic tumors. Int J Radiation Oncology Biol Phys 74:1494–1500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salem R, Lewandowski RJ, Mulcahy MF et al (2010) Radioembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma using yttrium-90 microspheres: a comprehensive report of long-term outcomes. Gastroenterology 138:52–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sangro B, Carpanese L, Cianni R et al (2011) Survival after yttrium-90 resin microsphere radioembolization of hepatocellular carcinoma across Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stages: A European evaluation. Hepatology 54:868–878PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bester L, Meteling B, Pavlakis N, Chua TC, Saxena A, Morris DL (2012) Radioembolization versus standard care of hepatic metastases: Comparative retrospective cohort study of survival outcomes and adverse events of salvage patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol 23:96–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liu DM, Salem R, Bui JT et al (2005) Angiographic considerations in patients undergoing liver-directed therapy. J Vasc Interv Radiol 16:911–935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lewandowski RJ, Sato KT, Atassi B et al (2007) Radioembolization with 90Y microspheres: angiographic and technical considerations. Cardiovasc Invervent Radiol 30:571–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hong K, Chomas J, Kraitchman D, Naglreiter B, Arepathy A (2011) Quantification and reduction of reflux during embolotherapy using Micro CT and Tantalum Beads with ex-vivo analysis. World Conference of Interventional Oncology, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rose SC, Lim GM, Arellano RS, Easter DB, Roberts AC (1998) Temporary splenic artery balloon occlusion for protection of nonsplenic vascular beds during splenic embolization. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1186–1188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rose SC, Kikolski SG, Nutting CW, Sze DY (2012) Relationship of aortoceliac angle and the ability to advance a Surefire® Guidecath into the targeted hepatic artery. [Abstract 550209]. Global Embolization Symposium and Therapy Annual Meeting, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nakamura H, Hashimoto T, Oi H, Sawada S, Furui S (1991) Prevention of gastric complications in hepatic arterial chemoembolization. Balloon catheter occlusion technique. Acta Radiol 32:81–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mahvash A, Zaer N, Shaw C, Chasen B, Avritscher R, Murthy R (2012) Temporary balloon occlusion of the common hepatic artery for administration of yttrium-90 resin microspheres in a patient with patent hepatoenteric collaterals. J Vasc Interv Radiol 23:277–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haydar AA, Wasan H, Wilson C, Tait P (2010) 90Y Radioembolization: Embolization of the gastroduodenal artery is not always appropriate. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:1069–1071PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abdelmaksoud MHK, Hwang GL, Louie JD et al (2010) Development of new hepaticoenteric collateral pathways after hepatic arterial skeletonization in preparation for yttrium-90 radioembolization. J Vasc Interv Radiol 21:1385–1395PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bilbao JI, Garrastachu P, Herráiz MJ et al (2010) Safety and efficacy assessment of flow redistribution by occlusion of intrahepatic vessels prior to radioembolization in the treatment of liver tumors. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 33:523–531PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven C. Rose
    • 1
  • Steven G. Kikolski
    • 1
  • James E. Chomas
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Radiology 8756, UCSD Medical CenterUniversity of California, San Diego Health SciencesSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.Surefire Medical, Inc.WestminsterUSA

Personalised recommendations