| Literature DB >> 30972007 |
Yupeng Zhang1, Fei Liang1, Yuxiang Zhang1, Peng Yan1, Shikai Liang2, Chao Ma1, Chuhan Jiang1.
Abstract
Object: The pipeline embolization device (PED) has been used to treat non-saccular, unruptured, intradural vertebral artery aneurysms at some institutions. However, there is an absence of large controlled studies validating the feasibility of this treatment. This study aimed to explore the therapeutic feasibility of PED by comparing PED treatment with controlled stent-assisted coiling (SAC). Materials andEntities:
Keywords: non-saccular aneurysm; pipeline embolization device; posterior circulation; stent-assisted coiling; vertebral artery aneurysm
Year: 2019 PMID: 30972007 PMCID: PMC6443633 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.003
Patient and aneurysm characteristics.
| Aneurysms' number | 33 | 65 | — |
| Patients' number | 30 | 64 | — |
| Procedures' number | 32 | 64 | — |
| Females, number (%) | 6 (18.8) | 7 (10.9) | 0.348 |
| Smoking, number (%) | 15 (46.9) | 27 (42.2) | 0.670 |
| Age (years), median (IQR) | 51 (47–58) | 53 (46.8–59) | 0.367 |
| Indications for treatment, number (%) | — | ||
| Aneurysms with high | 7 (21.9) | 24 (37.5) | |
| risk of rupture | |||
| Headache | 18 (56.3) | 18 (28.1) | |
| Dizziness | 13 (40.6) | 21 (32.8) | |
| Numbness of limb | 2 (6.3) | 3 (4.7) | |
| Vomiting | 5 (15.6) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Dysphagia | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Aneurysms location, number (%) | 0.567 | ||
| PICA involved | 4 (12.5) | 12 (18.8) | |
| PICA not involved | 28 (87.5) | 52 (81.2) | |
| Aneurysms' size (mm), median (IQR) | 11 (9.6–13.9) | 11.6 (8.4–15.0) | 0.635 |
| Parent artery stenosis (>50%), number (%) | 3 (9.4) | 9 (14.1) | 0.745 |
| Baseline mRS, number (%) | 1 | ||
| mRS 0-2 | 31 (96.9) | 62 (96.9) | |
| mRS 3-5 | 1 (3.1) | 2 (3.1) |
Figure 1(A,B) The pipeline embolization device (PED) was not fully deployed in two patients because of stenosis of the parent artery, which caused parent artery occlusion. Fortunately, both patients were asymptomatic with patency of the covered posterior inferior cerebellar arteries (PICAs) at final angiographic follow-up. (C) Controlled contrast shows foreshortening of the PED that occurred in the procedure; the PED did not cover the target aneurysms. An additional PED was deployed. The aneurysm is completely occluded with parent artery patency at final angiography. (D) An LVIS stent shows migration to the basilar trunk artery during the procedure. Fortunately, the patient had no neurologic deficient. Angiography demonstrates that the aneurysm was completely occluded with parent artery patency. (E) The LVIS is not fully deployed in the patient due to stenosis of the parent artery. Final follow-up angiography demonstrates that the aneurysm was completely occluded with parent artery occlusion. The patient did not have any neurological deficit with the covered PICA patency. (F) The V3 segment artery was ruptured spontaneously. Final angiography demonstrates parent artery occlusion at the rupture site.
Outcomes.
| Immediate occlusion rate, number (%) | < 0.001 | ||
| Complete occlusion (100%) | 0 (0) | 41 (64.1) | |
| Incomplete occlusion (< 100%) | 32 (100) | 23 (35.9) | |
| Periprocedural complications, number (%) | 3 (9.4) | 3 (4.7) | 0.397 |
| Subarachnoid hemorrhage | 1 (3.1) | 0 (0) | |
| Minor ischemic stroke | 1 (3.1) | 2 (3.1) | |
| Major ischemic stroke | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Embolus formation | 1 (3.1) | 0 (0) | |
| Technical event, number (%) | 3 (9.4) | 3 (4.7) | 0.397 |
| Migration of stent | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Insufficient opening of stent | 2 (6.3) | 1 (1.6) | |
| (>50%) | |||
| Foreshortening of stent | 1 (3.1) | 0 (0) | |
| Rupture of parent artery | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) | |
| Procedure length (min), median (IQR) | 95 (79.5–120) | 90 (69–120) | 0.386 |
| Post-treatment mRS score, number (%) | 1 | ||
| 0–2 | 31 (96.9) | 62 (96.9) | |
| 3–5 | 1 (3.1) | 2 (3.1) | |
| Latest imaging follow-up available, number (%) | 30 (93.8) | 51 (79.7) | 0.083 |
| Follow-up occlusion rate, number (%) | 0.118 | ||
| Raymond class I | 27 (90.0) | 37 (72.5) | |
| Raymond class II | 1 (3.3) | 10 (19.6) | |
| Raymond class III | 0 (0) | 2 (3.9) | |
| Parent artery obliteration | 2 (6.7) | 2 (3.9) | |
| Patency of covered PICA, number (%) | 10 (100) | 27 (100) | — |
| Delayed complications, number (%) | 0.625 | ||
| Parent artery occlusion | 2 (6.7) | 2 (3.9) | |
| Kaplan-Meier Occlusion time (Median days) | 165 | 248 | < 0.001 |
| Follow up mRS, number (%) | 0.551 | ||
| 0–2 | 32 (100) | 62 (96.9) | |
| 3–5 | 0 (0) | 2 (3.1) | |
| Morbidity | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) | 1 |
| Mortality | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | — |
Cox analysis outcomes.
| Age (>60 years) | 1.09 | 0.54–2.21 | 0.814 |
| Male gender | 0.95 | 0.47–1.93 | 0.885 |
| Smoking | 0.60 | 0.36–1.00 | 0.050 |
| Aneurysms' size | 0.97 | 0.92–1.03 | 0.342 |
| PICA arising from aneurysms | 0.67 | 0.32–1.41 | 0.291 |
| Parent artery stenosis (>50%) | 0.60 | 0.24–1.50 | 0.278 |
| Immediate occlusion | 0.78 | 0.47–1.29 | 0.331 |
| Modality (PED vs. SAC) | 2.74 | 1.66–4.53 | < 0.001 |
| Smoking | 0.53 | 0.31–0.89 | 0.018 |
| Modality (PED vs. SAC) | 2.97 | 1.79–4.93 | < 0.001 |
Figure 2(A) Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicate that smoking might prolong the aneurysm obliteration time, (B) and that patients treated with the pipeline embolization device have a shorter interval to obliteration than patients treated with stent-assisted coiling (+ in survival curves refers to censored values).