Joris A Broeders1, Usama Ahmed Ali2, Andrew J Molyneux3, Wojciech Poncyljusz4, Jean Raymond5, Phillip M White6, Brendan Steinfort1. 1. Department of Radiology, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Neurovascular and Neuroradiology Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 4. Department of Interventional Radiology, Pomeranian Medical University, Neurointerventional Cath Lab MSW Hospital, Szczecin, Poland. 5. Department of Radiology, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Laboratory of Interventional Neuroradiology Centre de recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal, Notre-Dame Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 6. Institute of Neuroscience, Newcastle University, Newcastle, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bioactive coils were introduced in 2002 in an attempt to improve aneurysm healing and durability of angiographic results. Evidence demonstrating superior efficacy to justify the routine use of bioactive coils over bare coils is limited. We compared the periprocedural and clinical outcome after bioactive and bare platinum coiling for intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Knowledge Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing bioactive and bare coils. The methodological quality was evaluated to assess bias risk. Periprocedural outcomes and mid-term outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Five independent RCTs comparing bioactive (n=1084) and bare coils (n=1084) were identified. Periprocedural outcome was similar for both groups. Bioactive coiling increased the rate of complete aneurysm occlusion (47% vs 40%; RR 1.17 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.31); p=0.006) and reduced the rate of residual aneurysm neck at 10 months compared with bare coiling in the mid-term (26% vs 31%; RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.96); p=0.01). There were no differences in aneurysm recurrence, aneurysm rupture, stroke, neurological death, modified Rankin Scale score and reinterventions. Subgroup analysis for the three RCTs on hydrogel coils demonstrated reduction of residual aneurysms compared with bare coiling (25% vs 34%; RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.99); p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Bioactive coils ensure a higher rate of medium-term complete aneurysm occlusion while reducing the rate of residual neck aneurysms compared with bare coiling in the mid-term. Hydrogel coils reduce residual aneurysms compared with bare coils. While there is level 1a evidence to show more complete aneurysm occlusion, longer term follow-up is needed to determine if this translates into clinical significance. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
BACKGROUND: Bioactive coils were introduced in 2002 in an attempt to improve aneurysm healing and durability of angiographic results. Evidence demonstrating superior efficacy to justify the routine use of bioactive coils over bare coils is limited. We compared the periprocedural and clinical outcome after bioactive and bare platinum coiling for intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Knowledge Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing bioactive and bare coils. The methodological quality was evaluated to assess bias risk. Periprocedural outcomes and mid-term outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Five independent RCTs comparing bioactive (n=1084) and bare coils (n=1084) were identified. Periprocedural outcome was similar for both groups. Bioactive coiling increased the rate of complete aneurysm occlusion (47% vs 40%; RR 1.17 (95% CI 1.05 to 1.31); p=0.006) and reduced the rate of residual aneurysm neck at 10 months compared with bare coiling in the mid-term (26% vs 31%; RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.96); p=0.01). There were no differences in aneurysm recurrence, aneurysm rupture, stroke, neurological death, modified Rankin Scale score and reinterventions. Subgroup analysis for the three RCTs on hydrogel coils demonstrated reduction of residual aneurysms compared with bare coiling (25% vs 34%; RR 0.76 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.99); p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Bioactive coils ensure a higher rate of medium-term complete aneurysm occlusion while reducing the rate of residual neck aneurysms compared with bare coiling in the mid-term. Hydrogel coils reduce residual aneurysms compared with bare coils. While there is level 1a evidence to show more complete aneurysm occlusion, longer term follow-up is needed to determine if this translates into clinical significance. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
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: Jose A Figueroa-Sanchez; Ana S Ferrigno; David E Hinojosa-González; Gustavo Salgado-Garza; Hector R Martinez; Enrique Caro-Osorio; Jesus G Garza-Garcia Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2020-04-21 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Daniel Knap; Wojciech Gruszka; Dominik Sieroń; Katarzyna Gruszczyńska; Michał Zawadzki; Miłosz Zbroszczyk; Jan Baron Journal: Pol J Radiol Date: 2017-04-10
Authors: Paweł Brzegowy; Iwona Kucybała; Kamil Krupa; Bartłomiej Łasocha; Aleksander Wilk; Paweł Latacz; Andrzej Urbanik; Tadeusz J Popiela Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2019-01-21 Impact factor: 1.195
Authors: Dimitri Laurent; Brandon Lucke-Wold; Owen Leary; Morgan H Randall; Ken Porche; Matthew Koch; Nohra Chalouhi; Adam Polifka; Brian L Hoh Journal: Neurosci Insights Date: 2022-07-30