title: Comparison of transendocardial and retrograde coronary venous intramyocardial catheter delivery systems in healthy and infarcted pigs.
abstract: We compared two routes for myocardial delivery of therapeutics, transendocardial (TE) delivery with an intramyocardial injection catheter, and retrograde coronary venous (RCV) delivery with a balloon occlusion catheter in the interventricular vein.
  
  
  METHODS
  TE and RCV injection of 15 microM, neutron-activatable microspheres was compared in healthy pigs (Group I, n = 3), pigs with a 1-week-old myocardial infarction (MI; group II, n = 5), and pigs with a 2-weeks-old MI (group III, n = 4). The MI was induced by a 1-hr balloon occlusion in the LAD. Both methods were compared in the same animal using different microspheres. The RCV catheter allowed for continuous measurement of distal pressure and 2.5 x 10(6) microspheres were injected in 10 ml at 300 mmHg above balloon occlusion pressure. The TE injections were targeted to the infarct zone and 2.5 x 10(6) microspheres were distributed over 10 injections of 200 microl.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The retention of microspheres decreased with increase in MI age, but was comparable between devices within the groups. RCV delivery resulted in (14.3 +/- 0.9)% microsphere retention in Group I, (10.3 +/- 0.2)% in Group II, and (6.4 +/- 0.1)% in group III (P < 0.05 versus group I). Microsphere retention after TE was (15.1 +/- 0.7)% in group I, (18.9 +/- 0.6)% in group II, (4.1 +/- 0.1)% in Group III (P < 0.05 versus groups I and II). The RCV catheter delivered primarily to midventricular, antero-septal segments, whereas TE targeted apical areas predominantly.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Delivery efficacy was comparable between devices in each group however RCV targeted midventricular areas whereas TE targeted apical areas.
authors.affiliation: Angiogenesis Research Center, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH, USA.
authors.forename: D V
authors.initials: DV
authors.lastname: Baklanov
authors.forename: K M
authors.initials: KM
authors.lastname: Moodie
authors.forename: F E
authors.initials: FE
authors.lastname: McCarthy
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Mandrusov
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Chiu
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Aswonge
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Cheng
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Chow
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Simons
authors.forename: E D
authors.initials: ED
authors.lastname: de Muinck
mesh_terms: D000714:Anastomosis, Surgical; D000818:Animals; D021721:Balloon Occlusion / Q000295:instrumentation; D006328:Cardiac Catheterization / Q000295:instrumentation; D003287:Contrast Media / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003326:Coronary Circulation; D003331:Coronary Vessels / Q000601:surgery*; D004195:Disease Models, Animal; D004699:Endocardium / Q000601:surgery*; D006346:Heart Septum / Q000601:surgery; D015918:Infusion Pumps, Implantable; D007262:Infusions, Intravenous; D007275:Injections, Intravenous; D008297:Male; D008863:Microspheres; D009203:Myocardial Infarction / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000628:therapy*; D010496:Pericardium / Q000601:surgery; D010865:Pilot Projects; D013318:Stroke Volume; D013552:Swine
chemical_list: D003287:Contrast Media