Liang-Der Jou1, Gouthami Chintalapani2, Michel E Mawad3. 1. Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA ljou@houstonmethodist.org. 2. Siemens Medical Solutions Hoffman Estates, Illinois, USA. 3. Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The metal coverage ratio (MCR) of a flow diverter influences the intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics; a high MCR will occlude an aneurysm early, while a low MCR may delay aneurysm occlusion. The true MCR of a pipeline embolization device (PED) could be lower due to oversize, device deformation, or aneurysm location. In this study deviation of the true MCR from the nominal MCR is assessed and whether their difference affects aneurysm occlusion rate is determined. METHODS: A total of 40 consecutive patients, each of them treated by one PED for their aneurysms at the internal carotid artery (ICA), were retrospectively analyzed. The DynaCT images of these deployed PEDs were used to determine their true dimensions and estimate three MCRs (local, mean, and nominal). These data were compared in two groups of patients who had different aneurysm outcomes at six months. RESULTS: The difference in the local MCR between two groups is small, but statistically significant (24.5% vs 21.6%, p=05). The local MCR is consistently lower than the nominal MCRs (23.2% vs 30.2%, p<0.001); however, the difference between the mean and local MCRs is small (23.9% vs 23.2%). CONCLUSIONS: An expectation that a PED can achieve a MCR of 30% may not be reasonable. Device oversize and deformation during deployment lower the local MCR by 5-7%. A lowered MCR affects the aneurysm occlusion rate at six months.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The metal coverage ratio (MCR) of a flow diverter influences the intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics; a high MCR will occlude an aneurysm early, while a low MCR may delay aneurysm occlusion. The true MCR of a pipeline embolization device (PED) could be lower due to oversize, device deformation, or aneurysm location. In this study deviation of the true MCR from the nominal MCR is assessed and whether their difference affects aneurysm occlusion rate is determined. METHODS: A total of 40 consecutive patients, each of them treated by one PED for their aneurysms at the internal carotid artery (ICA), were retrospectively analyzed. The DynaCT images of these deployed PEDs were used to determine their true dimensions and estimate three MCRs (local, mean, and nominal). These data were compared in two groups of patients who had different aneurysm outcomes at six months. RESULTS: The difference in the local MCR between two groups is small, but statistically significant (24.5% vs 21.6%, p=05). The local MCR is consistently lower than the nominal MCRs (23.2% vs 30.2%, p<0.001); however, the difference between the mean and local MCRs is small (23.9% vs 23.2%). CONCLUSIONS: An expectation that a PED can achieve a MCR of 30% may not be reasonable. Device oversize and deformation during deployment lower the local MCR by 5-7%. A lowered MCR affects the aneurysm occlusion rate at six months.
Authors: Z Kulcsár; E Houdart; A Bonafé; G Parker; J Millar; A J P Goddard; S Renowden; G Gál; B Turowski; K Mitchell; F Gray; M Rodriguez; R van den Berg; A Gruber; H Desal; I Wanke; D A Rüfenacht Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-11-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Justin R Mascitelli; Margaret Pain; Fedor Panov; Joshua B Bederson; Aman B Patel Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2015-05-01 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: Christopher R Durst; Robert M Starke; David Clopton; H Robert Hixson; Paul J Schmitt; Jean M Gingras; Dale Ding; Kenneth C Liu; R Webster Crowley; Mary E Jensen; Avery J Evans; John Gaughen Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: I Szikora; Z Berentei; Z Kulcsar; M Marosfoi; Z S Vajda; W Lee; A Berez; P K Nelson Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-02-11 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Nohra Chalouhi; Badih Daou; David Kung; Mario Zanaty; Jessica L Phillips; Stavropoula Tjoumakaris; Robert M Starke; David Hasan; Adam Polifka; Sussan Salas; Robert H Rosenwasser; Pascal M Jabbour Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Ali Sarrami-Foroushani; Toni Lassila; Michael MacRaild; Joshua Asquith; Kit C B Roes; James V Byrne; Alejandro F Frangi Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-06-23 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: T Sunohara; H Imamura; M Goto; R Fukumitsu; S Matsumoto; N Fukui; Y Oomura; T Akiyama; T Fukuda; K Go; S Kajiura; M Shigeyasu; K Asakura; R Horii; C Sakai; N Sakai Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Benjamin Csippa; Dániel Gyürki; Gábor Závodszky; István Szikora; György Paál Journal: Cardiovasc Eng Technol Date: 2019-12-03 Impact factor: 2.495