Literature DB >> 21131582

Remodeling technique for endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms had a higher rate of adequate postoperative occlusion than did conventional coil embolization with comparable safety.

Laurent Pierot1, Christophe Cognard, René Anxionnat, Frédéric Ricolfi.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the safety and efficacy of the remodeling technique with that of conventional coil embolization in a large multicenter series involving the endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, the CLARITY study (Clinical and Anatomic Results in the Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The institutional review board approved the CLARITY study, and written informed consent was obtained from all patients. A total of 768 patients (age range, 19-80 years; mean age ± standard deviation, 51.0 years ± 11.1) with 768 ruptured aneurysms were treated with either conventional coil embolization (608 patients, 79.2%) or the remodeling technique (160 patients, 20.8%). Patient and aneurysm characteristics, the rate of adverse events related to the treatment or initial intracranial hemorrhage, and patient outcome were compared between treatment groups by using the χ(2), Fisher exact, or Student t test.
RESULTS: The overall rate of treatment-related complications, with or without clinical manifestations, was 17.4% (106 of 608 patients) with coil embolization and 16.9% (27 of 160 patients) with remodeling (P = .999). The difference in the rates of thromboembolic events, intraoperative rupture, and early repeat bleeding between the treatment groups was not statistically significant. The cumulative morbidity and mortality rate related to the treatment in the remodeling group (3.8%, six of 160 patients) was similar to that in the coil embolization group (5.1%, 31 of 608 patients) (P = .678). Likewise, the global cumulative morbidity and mortality rates related to both the treatment and the initial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between groups (16.2% [26 of 160 patients] with remodeling and 19.6% [119 of 608 patients] with coil embolization, P = .366). The rate of adequate aneurysm occlusion, however, was significantly higher in the remodeling group (94.9%, 150 of 158 aneurysms) than in the coil embolization group (88.7%, 534 of 602 aneurysms) (P = .017).
CONCLUSION: In our large series of patients treated for ruptured aneurysms, the remodeling technique-despite being performed in aneurysms with unfavorable characteristics-was as safe as conventional coil embolization and more efficacious in terms of the rate of adequate postoperative occlusion. These results indicate that the remodeling technique can be routinely used in the treatment of ruptured aneurysms. © RSNA, 2010.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21131582     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10100894

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  44 in total

Review 1.  Review of 2 decades of aneurysm-recurrence literature, part 1: reducing recurrence after endovascular coiling.

Authors:  E Crobeddu; G Lanzino; D F Kallmes; H J Cloft
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  The place for remodeling technique and stenting in the endovascular management of intracranial aneurysms: a single-center analysis from 2008 to 2010.

Authors:  Laurent Pierot; Girish Rajpal; Krzysztof Kadziolka; Coralie Barbe
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 2.804

3.  Does stent-assisted coiling still have a place in the management of intracranial aneurysms?

Authors:  L Pierot; C Cognard
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Endovascular treatment of middle cerebral artery aneurysms for 120 nonselected patients: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  B Gory; A Rouchaud; S Saleme; F Dalmay; R Riva; F Caire; C Mounayer
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  WEB intrasaccular flow disruptor-prospective, multicenter experience in 83 patients with 85 aneurysms.

Authors:  C Papagiannaki; L Spelle; A-C Januel; A Benaissa; J-Y Gauvrit; V Costalat; H Desal; F Turjman; S Velasco; X Barreau; P Courtheoux; C Cognard; D Herbreteau; J Moret; L Pierot
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Stent-assisted coil embolization of intracranial aneurysms using the Solitaire™ AB Neurovascular Remodeling Device: initial and midterm follow-up results.

Authors:  Christin Clajus; Vojtech Sychra; Christoph Strasilla; Joachim Klisch
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 2.804

7.  WEB Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: Clinical and Anatomic Results in the French Observatory.

Authors:  L Pierot; J Moret; F Turjman; D Herbreteau; H Raoult; X Barreau; S Velasco; H Desal; A-C Januel; P Courtheoux; J-Y Gauvrit; C Cognard; A Molyneux; J Byrne; L Spelle
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-10-29       Impact factor: 3.825

8.  Endovascular embolization of branch-incorporated cerebral aneurysms.

Authors:  Yasuhiro Kawabata; Takuya Nakazawa; Shunichi Fukuda; Satoru Kawarazaki; Tomokazu Aoki; Takumi Morita; Tetsuya Tsukahara
Journal:  Neuroradiol J       Date:  2017-12

9.  Modified coil protection for proper coil frame configuration in wide-necked aneurysms.

Authors:  Young Dae Cho; Jong Kook Rhim; Jeong Jin Park; Jin Pyeong Jeon; Hyun-Seung Kang; Jeong Eun Kim; Won-Sang Cho; Moon Hee Han
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-03-28       Impact factor: 2.804

10.  Endovascular versus operative treatment of cerebral aneurysms: a comparison of results from a low-volume neurosurgical centre.

Authors:  Gorazd Bunc; Janez Ravnik; Matjaz Vorsic; Tomaz Seruga; Marko Jevsek; Tomaz Smigoc; Tomaz Velnar
Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 1.704

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.