An observational study in Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation, sponsored by Johns Hopkins University. Completed at 1 site in United States. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-02-01.
Sponsored by Johns Hopkins University · Observational
The purpose of this study is to compare the use of the Micro Vascular Plug (MVP) system and other embolic devices in treatment of PAVMs. Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations (PAVMs) are abnormal connections between the pulmonary vein and the pulmonary artery. This affects blood flow between the heart and lungs which puts patients at risk of stroke, brain abscess, hypoxia and even sudden death. The standard treatment of PAVMs is embolization. Embolization is the placing of an embolic (synthetic agent) into a blood vessel to block blood flow. The embolic is inserted via a catheter into the blood vessel. Detachable coils are the most commonly used embolic in the treatment of PAVMs. Despite long procedure times, numerous coils that are often required to occlude a single PAVM and recanalization rates ranging from 5% to 15%, the most widely used embolic device is still the detachable coil.
Transcatheter embolization has become the standard of care in the treatment of Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformations (PAVMs). PAVM embolization is performed to prevent right to left shunting which puts patients at risk of stroke, brain abscess, hypoxia and even sudden death. Despite long procedure times, numerous coils that are often required to occlude a single PAVM and recanalization rates ranging from 5% to 15%, the most widely used embolic device is still the detachable coil delivered through a microcatheter. An alternative to coil embolization is the Amplatzer Vascular plug (AVP). AVPs allow for quick delivery of a single occluding device. AVPs, however, cannot be delivered through a microcatheter, limiting the AVPs' utility to larger PAVM with larger feeding arteries. The new MVPTM Micro Vascular Plug System (MVP, Medtronic) was designed to combine the best of both devices and allows for the occlusion of small vessels in a quick and predictable manner with a single embolic device through a micro catheter. At the investigators' institution the investigators have a very large PAVM practice, as the investigators are a large Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) center of excellence. Currently there is a paucity of data comparing these devices for the treatment of PAVMs. Specifically, there is little data to inform interventional radiologists' decision making process about which device to choose based on the patient's clinical characteristics, the size of the PAVM feeding artery, and cost.
The investigators will create a registry/database of all patients who undergo embolization for Pulmonary AVM at the investigators' HHT center of excellence collecting data and adding in data from the investigators' existing PAVM database dating back at least the last 7 years. Patients with MVP embolizations will be assessed and compared to patients who are embolized with other solid embolic devices (coils/plugs). The investigators will assess reperfusion rates, immediate technical success, procedural attributes including procedure time, fluoroscopy time, contrast administration, and finally embolic and overall procedural costs.
141 studies on the registry are indexed under Hemangioma; 16 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 223 is above the median of 79 across 56 observational studies indexed under Hemangioma.
Browse Hemangioma studies →Johns Hopkins University is the lead sponsor of 1,783 studies on the registry; 313 are open to participants now.
Of its 203 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 140 (69%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Patients with Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation (PAVM) being treated through the Interventional Radiology clinic.
Exclusion Criteria:
All participants in the study will be patients who have been treated for Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation using Microvascular Plugs, Amplatzer Vascular Plugs or Detachable coils.
Device: Microvascular Plug (MVP) · Device: Amplatzer Vascular Plug (AVP) · Device: Detachable coils
Patient's Pulmonary AVM(s) treated via transcatheter embolization with Microvascular Plugs.
Patient's Pulmonary AVM(s) treated via transcatheter embolization with Amplatzer Vascular Plugs.
Patient's Pulmonary AVM(s) treated via transcatheter embolization with detachable coils.
Reperfusion Rates
Analyzed at 1 year and 3 years. Based on the investigators' preliminary data, reperfusion has been seen at 1-2 years in the patients the investigators have treated with coils and AVP making the 3-year goal for the investigators' prospective analysis feasible to cover reperfusion.
Time frame: Up to 3 Years
Immediate post-procedural success
Immediate post-procedural technical success defined as complete occlusion of the feeding artery supplying the PAVM.
Time frame: Immediately after procedure up to 5 minutes
Procedure duration
Duration of procedure in minutes.
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
Fluoroscopy time
Fluoroscopy time measured in minutes.
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
Contrast dose
Contrast dose in mL.
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
Cost of embolic device per PAVM
The number of embolic used per procedure will be used to determine the cost per PAVM.
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
Overall procedure cost for PAVM
Overall procedure cost for PAVM will be determined at 1 week after the procedure.
Time frame: Up to 1 week
Radiation Dose Area Product (DAP)
Radiation DAP measured in milligray-centimeters squared (mGy-cm\^2).
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
Cumulative Air Kerma (AK) dose
Cumulative Air Kerma dose measured in milligray (mGy).
Time frame: Up to 4 hours
This study is completed, as verified in Jan 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Johns Hopkins University