W Brinjikji1, G Lanzino2, H J Cloft2, A H Siddiqui3, R A Hanel4, D F Kallmes2. 1. From the Departments of Radiology (W.B., G.L., H.J.C., D.F.K.) kallmes.david@mayo.edu. 2. From the Departments of Radiology (W.B., G.L., H.J.C., D.F.K.) Neurosurgery (G.L., H.J.C., D.F.K.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Department of Neurosurgery (A.H.S.), State University of New York, Buffalo, New York. 4. Department of Neurosurgery (R.A.H.), Baptist Neurological Institute, Jacksonville, Florida.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The necessity for platelet-inhibition testing before aneurysm treatment in patients premedicated with antiplatelet agents is controversial. Using the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry, we studied complication rates in groups of patients who underwent platelet testing and those who did not undergo platelet testing to determine if these test results were associated with improved outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry with an unruptured aneurysm were categorized as those who underwent platelet testing before Pipeline embolization device treatment or those who did not. Complication rates were compared by using the Fisher exact or Pearson χ(2) test. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine if platelet function testing was independently associated with poor outcomes after adjusting for age, number of devices and aneurysms, aneurysm location and size, and practitioner and center volume. RESULTS: Compared with the patients who received a Pipeline embolization device without platelet testing, those who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement experienced higher rates of intracranial hemorrhage (0 of 187 [0.0%] vs 12 of 511 [2.3%], respectively; P = .04), neurologic morbidity (4 of 187 [2.1%] vs 42 of 511 [8.2%], respectively; P < .01), and combined neurologic morbidity and mortality (6 of 187 [3.2%] vs 45 of 511 [8.8%], respectively; P = .01). More patients in the platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device group were treated with multiple devices (227 [38.0%] vs 56 [27.8] patients, respectively; P = .01). On multivariate analysis, the group of patients who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement had higher odds of neurologic morbidity (OR, 3.25 [95% CI, 1.10-9.61]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Platelet testing in patients who undergo Pipeline embolization device placement is associated with higher rates of morbidity. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine if and when platelet testing in these patients is appropriate.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The necessity for platelet-inhibition testing before aneurysm treatment in patients premedicated with antiplatelet agents is controversial. Using the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry, we studied complication rates in groups of patients who underwent platelet testing and those who did not undergo platelet testing to determine if these test results were associated with improved outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Patients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry with an unruptured aneurysm were categorized as those who underwent platelet testing before Pipeline embolization device treatment or those who did not. Complication rates were compared by using the Fisher exact or Pearson χ(2) test. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine if platelet function testing was independently associated with poor outcomes after adjusting for age, number of devices and aneurysms, aneurysm location and size, and practitioner and center volume. RESULTS: Compared with the patients who received a Pipeline embolization device without platelet testing, those who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement experienced higher rates of intracranial hemorrhage (0 of 187 [0.0%] vs 12 of 511 [2.3%], respectively; P = .04), neurologic morbidity (4 of 187 [2.1%] vs 42 of 511 [8.2%], respectively; P < .01), and combined neurologic morbidity and mortality (6 of 187 [3.2%] vs 45 of 511 [8.8%], respectively; P = .01). More patients in the platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device group were treated with multiple devices (227 [38.0%] vs 56 [27.8] patients, respectively; P = .01). On multivariate analysis, the group of patients who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement had higher odds of neurologic morbidity (OR, 3.25 [95% CI, 1.10-9.61]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Platelet testing in patients who undergo Pipeline embolization device placement is associated with higher rates of morbidity. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine if and when platelet testing in these patients is appropriate.
Authors: Jerah D Nordeen; Alden V Patel; Robert M Darracott; Gretchen S Johns; Philipp Taussky; Rabih G Tawk; David A Miller; William D Freeman; Ricardo A Hanel Journal: J Vasc Interv Neurol Date: 2013-06
Authors: Lee A Tan; Kiffon M Keigher; Stephan A Munich; Roham Moftakhar; Demetrius K Lopes Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Josser E Delgado Almandoz; Benjamin M Crandall; Jill M Scholz; Jennifer L Fease; Ruth E Anderson; Yasha Kadkhodayan; David E Tubman Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2013-01-12 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Dániel Aradi; Robert F Storey; András Komócsi; Dietmar Trenk; Dietrich Gulba; Róbert Gábor Kiss; Steen Husted; Laurent Bonello; Dirk Sibbing; Jean-Philippe Collet; Kurt Huber Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2013-09-25 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Mayank Goyal; Kirill Orlov; Mary E Jensen; Allan Taylor; Charles Majoie; Mahesh Jayaraman; Jianmin Liu; Geneviève Milot; Patrick Brouwer; Shinichi Yoshimura; Felipe Albuquerque; Adam Arthur; David Kallmes; Nobuyuki Sakai; Justin F Fraser; Raul Nogueira; Pengfei Yang; Franziska Dorn; Lucie Thibault; Jens Fiehler; René Chapot; Johanna Maria Ospel Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2020-09-24 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: J M Ospel; P Brouwer; F Dorn; A Arthur; M E Jensen; R Nogueira; R Chapot; F Albuquerque; C Majoie; M Jayaraman; A Taylor; J Liu; J Fiehler; N Sakai; K Orlov; D Kallmes; J F Fraser; L Thibault; M Goyal Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: D Atasoy; N Kandasamy; J Hart; J Lynch; S-H Yang; D Walsh; C Tolias; T C Booth Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sophia Hohenstatt; Sergio L Vinci; Dominik F Vollherbst; Agostino Tessitore; Niclas Schmitt; Antonio Pitrone; Antonio A Caragliano; Mariano Velo; Markus A Möhlenbruch; Aldo Paolucci Journal: Clin Neuroradiol Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 3.649
Authors: Min Soo Kim; Kyung Il Jo; Je Young Yeon; Jong Soo Kim; Keon Ha Kim; Pyoung Jeon; Seung Chyul Hong Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2016-10-18 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Sami Al Kasab; Waldo R Guerrero; Daichi Nakagawa; Edgar A Samaniego; Santiago Ortega-Gutierrez; David Hasan Journal: Interv Neurol Date: 2019-01-16
Authors: Bowen Jiang; Matthew T Bender; Erick M Westbroek; Jessica K Campos; Li-Mei Lin; Risheng Xu; Rafael J Tamargo; Judy Huang; Geoffrey P Colby; Alexander L Coon Journal: Stroke Vasc Neurol Date: 2018-04-21