D Ley1, R Mühl-Benninghaus1, U Yilmaz1, H Körner1, G F M Cattaneo2, W Mailänder2, Y-J Kim3, B Scheller4, W Reith1, A Simgen5. 1. Departments of Neuroradiology, Saarland University Hospital, Kirrbergerstraße1, 66424, Homburg/Saar, Germany. 2. Acandis GmbH, Pforzheim, Germany. 3. Departments of Pathology, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany. 4. Departments of Cardiology, Saarland University Hospital, Homburg/Saar, Germany. 5. Departments of Neuroradiology, Saarland University Hospital, Kirrbergerstraße1, 66424, Homburg/Saar, Germany. andreassimgen@googlemail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In recent years, flow diverters have provided a promising alternative to treat complex intracranial aneurysms. In this study, we compare a second-generation flow-diverting device (Derivo Embolization Device) with its prototype flow diverter, in the treatment of elastase-induced aneurysms in New Zealand white rabbits. METHODS: The Derivo Embolization Device is a self-expanding stent consisting of 48 nitinol wires. The device was implanted across the necks of 17 elastase-induced aneurysms in New Zealand white rabbits. One additional device was implanted in the abdominal aorta of each animal covering the origin of lumbar arteries. Follow-up was performed after 3 months (n = 8) and 6 months (n = 9) under continuous double antiplatelet therapy. Statuses of angiographic and histological aneurysm occlusion as well as patency of branch arteries and neointimal growth were evaluated and compared with its prototype flow diverter. RESULTS: The Derivo Embolization Device provided advanced visibility and flexibility, which led to more accurate navigation and placement. Complete aneurysm occlusion rates were noted in 15 cases (88 %), respectively, compared with 5 cases (28 %) with the first-generation device (p = 0.001). Neointimal growth and diameter stenosis were significantly less with the Derivo Embolization Device and declining after 6 months follow-up in the abdominal aorta. Extreme device oversizing led to distal occlusion of the parent vessel in three cases. Covered branch arteries remained patent throughout the entire period of observation. CONCLUSIONS: The Derivo Embolization Device provides excellent occlusion of elastase-induced aneurysms while preserving branch arteries.
PURPOSE: In recent years, flow diverters have provided a promising alternative to treat complex intracranial aneurysms. In this study, we compare a second-generation flow-diverting device (Derivo Embolization Device) with its prototype flow diverter, in the treatment of elastase-induced aneurysms in New Zealand white rabbits. METHODS: The Derivo Embolization Device is a self-expanding stent consisting of 48 nitinol wires. The device was implanted across the necks of 17 elastase-induced aneurysms in New Zealand white rabbits. One additional device was implanted in the abdominal aorta of each animal covering the origin of lumbar arteries. Follow-up was performed after 3 months (n = 8) and 6 months (n = 9) under continuous double antiplatelet therapy. Statuses of angiographic and histological aneurysm occlusion as well as patency of branch arteries and neointimal growth were evaluated and compared with its prototype flow diverter. RESULTS: The Derivo Embolization Device provided advanced visibility and flexibility, which led to more accurate navigation and placement. Complete aneurysm occlusion rates were noted in 15 cases (88 %), respectively, compared with 5 cases (28 %) with the first-generation device (p = 0.001). Neointimal growth and diameter stenosis were significantly less with the Derivo Embolization Device and declining after 6 months follow-up in the abdominal aorta. Extreme device oversizing led to distal occlusion of the parent vessel in three cases. Covered branch arteries remained patent throughout the entire period of observation. CONCLUSIONS: The Derivo Embolization Device provides excellent occlusion of elastase-induced aneurysms while preserving branch arteries.
Authors: Santosh B Murthy; Shreyansh Shah; Aditi Shastri; Chethan P Venkatasubba Rao; Eric M Bershad; Jose I Suarez Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2013-10-13 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: H J Cloft; T A Altes; W F Marx; R J Raible; S B Hudson; G A Helm; J W Mandell; M E Jensen; J E Dion; D F Kallmes Journal: Radiology Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Zsolt Kulcsár; Ulrike Ernemann; Stephan G Wetzel; Alexander Bock; Sophia Goericke; Vasilis Panagiotopoulos; Michael Forsting; Daniel A Ruefenacht; Isabel Wanke Journal: Stroke Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: T E Darsaut; E Rayner-Hartley; A Makoyeva; I Salazkin; F Berthelet; J Raymond Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: L Goertz; T Liebig; E Siebert; M Herzberg; L Pennig; M Schlamann; J Borggrefe; B Krischek; F Dorn; C Kabbasch Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-09-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andreas Simgen; Désirée Ley; Christian Roth; Giorgio Franco Maria Cattaneo; Ruben Mühl-Benninghaus; Andreas Müller; Heiko Körner; Yoo-Jin Kim; Bruno Scheller; Wolfgang Reith; Umut Yilmaz Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Christian A Taschner; Christian Paul Stracke; Franziska Dorn; Krzysztof Bartosz Kadziolka; Kornelia Kreiser; László Solymosi; Mirko Pham; Jan Hendrik Buhk; Bernd Turowski; Wolfgang Reith; Samer Elsheikh; Stephan Meckel; Hendrik Janssen; Alexander Hammer; Oliver Beuing; Olav Jansen; Horst Urbach; Michael Knauth; Carolin Jenkner; René Chapot Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2020-09-08 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: Francesco Briganti; Giuseppe Leone; Lorenzo Ugga; Mariano Marseglia; Antonio Macera; Andrea Manto; Luigi Delehaye; Maurizio Resta; Mariachiara Resta; Nicola Burdi; Nunzio Paolo Nuzzi; Ignazio Divenuto; Ferdinando Caranci; Mario Muto; Domenico Solari; Paolo Cappabianca; Francesco Maiuri Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 5.836