BACKGROUND: Y-stenting is an effective but challenging approach for wide-neck aneurysms. PulseRider (PR) (Pulsar/Cerenovus) is a new device designed to provide scaffolding during coiling but has never been compared with other techniques. OBJECTIVE: To compare the immediate and 6-mo results of Y-stenting vs PR assisted coiling. METHODS: A total of 105 consecutive patients were retrospectively divided into 2 groups (73 Y-stenting and 32 PR). All underwent angiographic 6-mo follow-up. We evaluated if some anatomical features could influence treatment results. RESULTS: The groups were homogeneous. Immediate adequate occlusions as well as complication rates were similar in Y-stenting and PR group (94.5% vs 96.9% and 8.2% vs 6.2%, respectively). At 6 mo, adequate occlusion was 93.1% after Y-stenting and 84.3% after PR (P = .28), complete occlusion was significantly higher after Y-stenting: 90.3% vs 62.5% (P = .0017). Occlusion grade worsening occurred in 6.9% of Y-stenting and 18.7% of PR patients (P = .09).Neck size was associated with occlusion grade in both groups. Maximal aneurysm size was associated with occlusion grade in the PR group (P = .023) but not in the Y-stenting group (P = .06). After PR, 6-mo occlusion rate was higher in small (< 10 mm) than in large aneurysms (P = .0094); this was not observed after Y-stenting (P = .54).Location did not significantly affect the mid-term occlusion rate in both the groups. After PR, occlusion was more stable in basilar than anterior or middle cerebral artery aneurysms. CONCLUSION: Y-stenting and PR are both effective with similar immediate and mid-term results. However, treatment stability seems higher after Y-stenting. Aneurysm size seems to negatively affect PR results.
BACKGROUND: Y-stenting is an effective but challenging approach for wide-neck aneurysms. PulseRider (PR) (Pulsar/Cerenovus) is a new device designed to provide scaffolding during coiling but has never been compared with other techniques. OBJECTIVE: To compare the immediate and 6-mo results of Y-stenting vs PR assisted coiling. METHODS: A total of 105 consecutive patients were retrospectively divided into 2 groups (73 Y-stenting and 32 PR). All underwent angiographic 6-mo follow-up. We evaluated if some anatomical features could influence treatment results. RESULTS: The groups were homogeneous. Immediate adequate occlusions as well as complication rates were similar in Y-stenting and PR group (94.5% vs 96.9% and 8.2% vs 6.2%, respectively). At 6 mo, adequate occlusion was 93.1% after Y-stenting and 84.3% after PR (P = .28), complete occlusion was significantly higher after Y-stenting: 90.3% vs 62.5% (P = .0017). Occlusion grade worsening occurred in 6.9% of Y-stenting and 18.7% of PR patients (P = .09).Neck size was associated with occlusion grade in both groups. Maximal aneurysm size was associated with occlusion grade in the PR group (P = .023) but not in the Y-stenting group (P = .06). After PR, 6-mo occlusion rate was higher in small (< 10 mm) than in large aneurysms (P = .0094); this was not observed after Y-stenting (P = .54).Location did not significantly affect the mid-term occlusion rate in both the groups. After PR, occlusion was more stable in basilar than anterior or middle cerebral artery aneurysms. CONCLUSION: Y-stenting and PR are both effective with similar immediate and mid-term results. However, treatment stability seems higher after Y-stenting. Aneurysm size seems to negatively affect PR results.