Efficiency of Air Bubble Removal in Preparation of Low-Profile Angioplasty Balloon Catheter: Bench-Top Comparison of Six Methods
10.5469/neuroint.2018.01074
- Author:
Joon Ho CHOI
1
;
Seon Moon HWANG
;
Deok Hee LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. dhlee@amc.seoul.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Intracranial atherosclerosis;
Balloon angioplasty;
Air embolism;
Device failure
- MeSH:
Angioplasty;
Angioplasty, Balloon;
Catheters;
Clothing;
Embolism, Air;
Equipment Failure;
Inflation, Economic;
Intracranial Arteriosclerosis;
Methods;
Syringes
- From:Neurointervention
2019;14(1):27-34
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Complete removal of air bubbles from balloons for neurovascular angioplasty is cumbersome. We compared the preparation difficulty, air removal efficiency, and air collection pattern of six different balloon catheter preparation methods to propose a better preparation method for both initial and second balloon uses, especially for small-profile angioplasty balloon catheters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 18 neurovascular angioplasty balloon catheters with nominal diameters of 2 mm were prepared to test six different preparation methods: the instruction for use method (method A), simplified method using a syringe (method B) and four newly devised preparation methods using inflating devices (methods C–F). Serial radiographs were obtained while the balloons were gradually inflated. We measured the time for each preparation and the bubble number, analyzed their distribution in the balloon, and calculated the contrast filling ratio (contrast filling area/total balloon area) for initial and second ballooning. The whole process was repeated three times. RESULTS: The preparation time varied widely (11.5 seconds [method D] to 73.3 seconds [method A]). On initial inflation, the contrast filling ratio at 8 atm was the highest (100%) with methods A and F. On second inflation, the ratio was again highest with method A (99.5%), followed by method F (99.2%). Initial ballooning tended to show a uniform pattern of single bubble in the distal segment of the balloon; in contrast, second ballooning showed varying patterns in which the bubbles were multiple and randomly distributed. CONCLUSION: None of the six methods were able to completely exclude air bubbles from the balloon catheters including the second ballooning; however, the method of repeating aspiration with high-volume inflating device (method F) could be a practical option considering the simplicity and efficiency of preparation.
