A Rouchaud1,2, C Ramana3, W Brinjikji3,4, Y-H Ding3, D Dai3, T Gunderson5, J Cebral6, D F Kallmes3,4, R Kadirvel3. 1. From the Applied Neuroradiology Laboratory (A.R., C.R., W.B., Y.-H.D., D.D., D.F.K., R.K.) aymeric.rouchaud@gmail.com. 2. Interventional Neuroradiology NEURI Center (A.R.), Hôpital Bicêtre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. 3. From the Applied Neuroradiology Laboratory (A.R., C.R., W.B., Y.-H.D., D.D., D.F.K., R.K.). 4. Departments of Radiology (W.B., D.F.K.). 5. Health Sciences Research, Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics (T.G.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 6. Department of Bioengineering (J.C.), George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Robust wall apposition for flow-diverter stents may be important for endothelialization. Using a large series of experimental aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device, the objectives of this study were to 1) assess interobserver agreement for the evaluation of wall apposition on posttreatment DSA and evaluate its association with aneurysm occlusion, and 2) measure the relationship between wall apposition assessed with histology and aneurysm occlusion rate after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Saccular aneurysms were created in 41 rabbits and treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device. DSA was performed just after the deployment of the device and at follow-up. Three investigators independently graded wall apposition on posttreatment DSA as good or poor. A histopathologist blinded to the angiographic results graded the wall apposition on histologic samples. We examined the correlation between angiographic occlusion and wall apposition with histology and angiography. RESULTS: Wall apposition evaluated on histology was strongly associated with saccular aneurysm occlusion. Sensitivity and specificity of wall apposition to predict complete occlusion at follow-up were 76.9% and 84.0%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 81.6%. In this experimental study, DSA was suboptimal to assess flow-diverter apposition, with moderate interobserver agreement and low accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Good wall apposition is strongly associated with complete occlusion after flow-diverter therapy. In this study, DSA was suboptimal for assessing wall apposition of flow-diverter stents. These findings suggest that improved tools for assessing flow diverter-stent wall apposition are highly relevant.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Robust wall apposition for flow-diverter stents may be important for endothelialization. Using a large series of experimental aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device, the objectives of this study were to 1) assess interobserver agreement for the evaluation of wall apposition on posttreatment DSA and evaluate its association with aneurysm occlusion, and 2) measure the relationship between wall apposition assessed with histology and aneurysm occlusion rate after treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Saccular aneurysms were created in 41 rabbits and treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device. DSA was performed just after the deployment of the device and at follow-up. Three investigators independently graded wall apposition on posttreatment DSA as good or poor. A histopathologist blinded to the angiographic results graded the wall apposition on histologic samples. We examined the correlation between angiographic occlusion and wall apposition with histology and angiography. RESULTS: Wall apposition evaluated on histology was strongly associated with saccular aneurysm occlusion. Sensitivity and specificity of wall apposition to predict complete occlusion at follow-up were 76.9% and 84.0%, respectively, with an overall accuracy of 81.6%. In this experimental study, DSA was suboptimal to assess flow-diverter apposition, with moderate interobserver agreement and low accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: Good wall apposition is strongly associated with complete occlusion after flow-diverter therapy. In this study, DSA was suboptimal for assessing wall apposition of flow-diverter stents. These findings suggest that improved tools for assessing flow diverter-stent wall apposition are highly relevant.
Authors: N V Patel; M J Gounis; A K Wakhloo; N Noordhoek; J Blijd; D Babic; D Takhtani; S-K Lee; A Norbash Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2010-10-21 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Dale Ding; Robert M Starke; Christopher R Durst; John R Gaughen; Avery J Evans; Mary E Jensen; Kenneth C Liu Journal: J Clin Neurosci Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 1.961
Authors: Giovanni Amoroso; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Christian Spaulding; Stephane Manzo-Silberman; Karl E Hauptmann; René Spaargaren; Héctor M García-García; Patrick W Serruys; Stefan Verheye Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: J Caroff; C Mihalea; H Neki; D Ruijters; L Ikka; N Benachour; J Moret; L Spelle Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-02-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Patrick Z McVeigh; Raphael Sacho; Robert A Weersink; Vitor M Pereira; Walter Kucharczyk; Eric J Seibel; Brian C Wilson; Timo Krings Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Matthew J Gounis; Giovanni J Ughi; Miklos Marosfoi; Demetrius K Lopes; David Fiorella; Hiram G Bezerra; Conrad W Liang; Ajit S Puri Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: S Gomez-Paz; Y Akamatsu; J M Moore; C S Ogilvy; A J Thomas; C J Griessenauer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: O Brina; P Bouillot; P Reymond; A S Luthman; C Santarosa; M Fahrat; K O Lovblad; P Machi; B M A Delattre; V M Pereira; M I Vargas Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-11-14 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: K Janot; R Fahed; A Rouchaud; K Zuber; G Boulouis; G Forestier; C Mounayer; M Piotin Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-11-18 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jildaz Caroff; Robert M King; Giovanni J Ughi; Miklos Marosfoi; Erin T Langan; Christopher Raskett; Ajit S Puri; Matthew J Gounis Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-11-16 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Zeynep Vardar; Robert M King; Afif Kraitem; Erin T Langan; Lindsy M Peterson; Benjamin H Duncan; Christopher M Raskett; Vania Anagnostakou; Matthew J Gounis; Ajit S Puri; Giovanni J Ughi Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2020-09-28 Impact factor: 8.572