Literature DB >> 30472674

Pipeline embolization device treatment of internal carotid artery terminus aneurysms.

Amit Pujari1, Brian Matthew Howard2, Thomas P Madaelil2, Susana Libhaber Skukalek2, Anil K Roy2, Jacques E Dion3, C Michael Cawley2, Jonathan A Grossberg2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The pipeline embolization device (PED) is approved for the treatment of large aneurysms of the proximal internal carotid artery (ICA). Its off-label application in treating aneurysms located specifically at the ICA terminus (ICA-T) has not been studied.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients from 2011 to 7 treated with PEDs. Out of 365 patients, 10 patients with ICA-T aneurysms were included. Patient demographics, procedural information, follow-up imaging, and clinical assessments were recorded.
RESULTS: Mean age was 46.9 years (± 8.8), and 6 (60%) patients were women. The mean maximum diameter of the aneurysms treated was 14.7 mm (± 10.7) and the mean neck diameter was 9.3 mm (± 6.6). Reasons for presentation included six incidental findings, one acute subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), and three patients with prior SAH. Kamran-Byrne Occlusion Scale scores for the treated aneurysms were as follows: three class IV (complete obliteration), four class III (<50% filling in both height and width for fusiform aneurysms or residual neck for saccular aneurysms), one class II fusiform aneurysm, 1 class 0 saccular aneurysm (residual aneurysm body), and one not classified due to pipeline thrombosis. Two clinically asymptomatic complications were noted: one patient who had a small distal cortical SAH post PED and one patient whose stent was found to be thrombosed on follow-up angiogram. All patients were seen in follow-up, and no patients were found to have worsening of their pre-procedure modified Rankin Scale score.
CONCLUSION: The PED has potential for treating ICA-T aneurysms not amenable to conventional treatment strategies. Further studies are warranted to confirm the long term outcomes. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Entities:  

Keywords:  internal carotid artery terminus aneurysm; pipeline

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30472674     DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014312

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg        ISSN: 1759-8478            Impact factor:   5.836


  4 in total

1.  Application of flow diverters in the treatment of aneurysms in the internal carotid artery bifurcation region.

Authors:  Mostafa Mahmoud; Ahmed Farag; Mostafa Farid; Ahmed Elserwi; Amr Abdelsamad; Wessam Guergues; Farouk Hassan
Journal:  Neuroradiol J       Date:  2020-05-18

2.  Safety Evaluation and Flow Modification in the Anterior Cerebral Artery after Pipeline Embolization Device Deployment across the Internal Carotid Artery Terminus.

Authors:  Chao Xu; Pei Wu; Jianyi Han; Bowen Sun; Chunlei Wang; Shancai Xu; Bin Luo; Xinjian Yang; Qingchun Mu; Huaizhang Shi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Endoluminal flow diverters in the treatment of sidewall and bifurcation aneurysm: A systematic review and meta-analysis of complications and angiographic outcomes.

Authors:  Mehdi Abbasi; Luis E Savasatano; Waleed Brinjikji; Kevin M Kallmes; Nick Mikoff; Natalie Reierson; Mohamed Abdelmegeed; John Pederson; Beth Warren; Jillienne C Touchette; Sarah Khan; Shelby Kamrowski; Averi Barrett; David F Kallmes; Ramanathan Kadirvel
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 1.764

4.  Expanding Indications for Flow Diverters: Distal Aneurysms, Bifurcation Aneurysms, Small Aneurysms, Previously Coiled Aneurysms and Clipped Aneurysms, and Carotid Cavernous Fistulas.

Authors:  Nicola Limbucci; Giuseppe Leone; Leonardo Renieri; Sergio Nappini; Federico Cagnazzo; Antonio Laiso; Mario Muto; Salvatore Mangiafico
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 4.654

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.