INTRODUCTION: The overall safety of the HydroCoil, an expansile hybrid hydrogel-platinum coil, is unknown. We report a prospective observational study of our first 100 cerebral aneurysms treated with HydroCoils, focusing on safety and initial efficacy. METHODS: Indications, procedural complications, clinical and angiographic outcomes were recorded. Packing density, number of coils deployed and angiographic results were compared with those in a matched control group of 100 aneurysms treated solely with bare platinum coils. HydroCoil complication rates were compared to bare platinum coil rates at our institution and in published series. RESULTS: Adjuvant HydroCoil treatment led to increased mean percentage aneurysm filling compared to controls (50 +/- 21% versus 27 +/- 13%, P < 0.001). Immediate posttreatment angiographic results showed significantly (P < 0.001) more complete occlusions and fewer incomplete (<95%) occlusions compared to controls. Intermediate follow-up angiograms (median 7.5 months) in 63 aneurysms showed a trend towards fewer incomplete occlusions with HydroCoil treatment. There were significantly fewer major recurrences with HydroCoil treatment compared to the control treatment (9.5% versus 22.6%, P = 0.046). In the adjuvant HydroCoil group, major recurrent aneurysms had significantly less percentage volume packing with HydroCoils than non-recurrent aneurysms (50.3 +/- 5.0% versus 65.3 +/- 18.0%, P = 0.04). There was a 12% procedural complication rate, 6% procedural morbidity and 1% mortality rate, similar to institutional and reported bare platinum coil complication rates. CONCLUSION: HydroCoils can be safely deployed with a similar complication rate to bare platinum coils. They result in improved aneurysm filling. Intermediate follow-up angiography showed significantly fewer major recurrences. Long-term follow-up is required to confirm initial improved stability.
INTRODUCTION: The overall safety of the HydroCoil, an expansile hybrid hydrogel-platinum coil, is unknown. We report a prospective observational study of our first 100 cerebral aneurysms treated with HydroCoils, focusing on safety and initial efficacy. METHODS: Indications, procedural complications, clinical and angiographic outcomes were recorded. Packing density, number of coils deployed and angiographic results were compared with those in a matched control group of 100 aneurysms treated solely with bare platinum coils. HydroCoil complication rates were compared to bare platinum coil rates at our institution and in published series. RESULTS: Adjuvant HydroCoil treatment led to increased mean percentage aneurysm filling compared to controls (50 +/- 21% versus 27 +/- 13%, P < 0.001). Immediate posttreatment angiographic results showed significantly (P < 0.001) more complete occlusions and fewer incomplete (<95%) occlusions compared to controls. Intermediate follow-up angiograms (median 7.5 months) in 63 aneurysms showed a trend towards fewer incomplete occlusions with HydroCoil treatment. There were significantly fewer major recurrences with HydroCoil treatment compared to the control treatment (9.5% versus 22.6%, P = 0.046). In the adjuvant HydroCoil group, major recurrent aneurysms had significantly less percentage volume packing with HydroCoils than non-recurrent aneurysms (50.3 +/- 5.0% versus 65.3 +/- 18.0%, P = 0.04). There was a 12% procedural complication rate, 6% procedural morbidity and 1% mortality rate, similar to institutional and reported bare platinum coil complication rates. CONCLUSION: HydroCoils can be safely deployed with a similar complication rate to bare platinum coils. They result in improved aneurysm filling. Intermediate follow-up angiography showed significantly fewer major recurrences. Long-term follow-up is required to confirm initial improved stability.
Authors: John Thornton; Gerard M Debrun; Victor A Aletich; Qasim Bashir; Fady T Charbel; James Ausman Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Sophie Gallas; Anne Pasco; Jean-Philippe Cottier; Jean Gabrillargues; Jacques Drouineau; Christophe Cognard; Denis Herbreteau Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: H Ujiie; H Tachibana; O Hiramatsu; A L Hazel; T Matsumoto; Y Ogasawara; H Nakajima; T Hori; K Takakura; F Kajiya Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Ron C Gaba; Sameer A Ansari; Soma Sinha Roy; Franklin A Marden; Marlos A G Viana; Tim W Malisch Journal: Stroke Date: 2006-05-04 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Yuichi Murayama; Yih Lin Nien; Gary Duckwiler; Y Pierre Gobin; Reza Jahan; John Frazee; Neil Martin; Fernando Viñuela Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Andrew J Molyneux; Richard S C Kerr; Ly-Mee Yu; Mike Clarke; Mary Sneade; Julia A Yarnold; Peter Sandercock Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Sep 3-9 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: M H Schönfeld; V Schlotfeldt; N D Forkert; E Goebell; M Groth; E Vettorazzi; Y D Cho; M H Han; H-S Kang; J Fiehler Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Jingjie Hu; Hassan Albadawi; Brian W Chong; Amy R Deipolyi; Rahul A Sheth; Ali Khademhosseini; Rahmi Oklu Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 30.849
Authors: Karl R Abi-Aad; Rami James N Aoun; Rudy J Rahme; Jennifer D Ward; Jason Kniss; Mary Jeanne Kwasny; Mithun G Sattur; Matthew E Welz; Bernard R Bendok Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: W Brinjikji; P M White; H Nahser; J Wardlaw; R Sellar; H J Cloft; D F Kallmes Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-03-12 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Daniel Knap; Wojciech Gruszka; Dominik Sieroń; Katarzyna Gruszczyńska; Michał Zawadzki; Miłosz Zbroszczyk; Jan Baron Journal: Pol J Radiol Date: 2017-04-10