BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Coated coils have been in clinical use for several years without robust evidence to determine their safety/efficacy. The HydroCoil Endovascular Aneurysm Occlusion and Packing Study (HELPS) addresses this deficiency for the HydroCoil embolic system. This article reports periprocedural safety/operator-assessed angiographic results from HELPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to the hydrogel coil or control arms by using concealed allocation with minimization matching groups. Any bare platinum coils were allowed in the control arm, and assist devices could be used as clinically required. Both recently ruptured and not recently ruptured/unruptured aneurysms were included. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS:Four hundred ninety-nine patients were recruited. Coiling was successful in 98.6%. Mean aneurysm size was 6.5 mm (26% were > or =10 mm), 53% were recently ruptured aneurysms, and an assist device was used in 46%. Seventy procedural adverse events were reported in hydrogel coils and 86 in control arms. The 3-month mortality rate was 3.6% in hydrogel coils and 2.0% in control arms; the difference was not significant (P = .6). There was a lower 2-month mortality rate in the HELPS subarachnoid hemorrhage cohort (4.1%) than would be anticipated from the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (7%). There was a trend toward increased adverse events when assist devices were used, which was substantial for stents deployed in recently ruptured aneurysms. Ninety-six percent of patients discharged were World Federation of Neurosurgeons grade 0-2 at discharge. No difference was found between arms in the operator assessment of angiographic occlusions (P = .3). CONCLUSION: These HELPS results reinforce coiling as an effective treatment for aneurysms, with an excellent technical success rate. Hydrogel coils can be used in a wide spectrum of aneurysms with a risk profile equivalent to that of bare platinum.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Coated coils have been in clinical use for several years without robust evidence to determine their safety/efficacy. The HydroCoil Endovascular Aneurysm Occlusion and Packing Study (HELPS) addresses this deficiency for the HydroCoil embolic system. This article reports periprocedural safety/operator-assessed angiographic results from HELPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients were randomized to the hydrogel coil or control arms by using concealed allocation with minimization matching groups. Any bareplatinum coils were allowed in the control arm, and assist devices could be used as clinically required. Both recently ruptured and not recently ruptured/unruptured aneurysms were included. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Four hundred ninety-nine patients were recruited. Coiling was successful in 98.6%. Mean aneurysm size was 6.5 mm (26% were > or =10 mm), 53% were recently ruptured aneurysms, and an assist device was used in 46%. Seventy procedural adverse events were reported in hydrogel coils and 86 in control arms. The 3-month mortality rate was 3.6% in hydrogel coils and 2.0% in control arms; the difference was not significant (P = .6). There was a lower 2-month mortality rate in the HELPS subarachnoid hemorrhage cohort (4.1%) than would be anticipated from the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (7%). There was a trend toward increased adverse events when assist devices were used, which was substantial for stents deployed in recently ruptured aneurysms. Ninety-six percent of patients discharged were World Federation of Neurosurgeons grade 0-2 at discharge. No difference was found between arms in the operator assessment of angiographic occlusions (P = .3). CONCLUSION: These HELPS results reinforce coiling as an effective treatment for aneurysms, with an excellent technical success rate. Hydrogel coils can be used in a wide spectrum of aneurysms with a risk profile equivalent to that of bareplatinum.
Authors: David O Wiebers; J P Whisnant; J Huston; I Meissner; R D Brown; D G Piepgras; G S Forbes; K Thielen; D Nichols; W M O'Fallon; J Peacock; L Jaeger; N F Kassell; G L Kongable-Beckman; J C Torner Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-07-12 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: F Gjerris; S E Børgesen; P S Sørensen; F Boesen; K Schmidt; A Harmsen; J Lester Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 1987 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Jean Raymond; François Guilbert; Alain Weill; Stavros A Georganos; Louis Juravsky; Anick Lambert; Julie Lamoureux; Miguel Chagnon; Daniel Roy Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-05-29 Impact factor: 7.914
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: Adriana Campi; Najib Ramzi; Andrew J Molyneux; Paul E Summers; Richard S C Kerr; Mary Sneade; Julia A Yarnold; Joan Rischmiller; James V Byrne Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-03-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M H T Reinges; T Krings; A Y Drexler; A Ludolph; B Sellhaus; M Bovi; S Geibprasert; R Agid; K Scherer; F J Hans Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: J Raymond; R Klink; M Chagnon; S L Barnwell; A J Evans; J Mocco; B H Hoh; A S Turk; R D Turner; H Desal; D Fiorella; S Bracard; A Weill; F Guilbert; S Lanthier; A J Fox; T E Darsaut; P M White; D Roy Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Anass Benomar; Behzad Farzin; David Volders; Guylaine Gevry; Justine Zehr; Robert Fahed; William Boisseau; Jean-Christophe Gentric; Elsa Magro; Lorena Nico; Daniel Roy; Alain Weill; Charbel Mounayer; François Guilbert; Laurent Létourneau-Guillon; Gregory Jacquin; Chiraz Chaalala; Marc Kotowski; Thanh N Nguyen; David Kallmes; Phil White; Tim E Darsaut; Jean Raymond Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2021-02-24 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: Andrew J Molyneux; Richard S C Kerr; Jacqueline Birks; Najib Ramzi; Julia Yarnold; Mary Sneade; Joan Rischmiller Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2009-03-28 Impact factor: 44.182