S Gomez-Paz1, Y Akamatsu1, J M Moore1, C S Ogilvy1, A J Thomas1, C J Griessenauer2,3. 1. From the Neurosurgical Service (S.G-P., Y.A., J.M.M., C.S.O., A.J.T.), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Neurosurgery (C.J.G.), Geisinger, Danville, Pennsylvania christoph.griessenauer@gmail.com. 3. Research Institute of Neurointervention (C.J.G.), Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The angiographic collar sign has been recently described in patients with incompletely occluded aneurysms after Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. The long-term implications of this sign are unknown. We report angiographic outcomes of patients with the collar sign with follow-up of up to 45 months and the implications of this angiographic finding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained data base of patients who underwent Pipeline Embolization Device implantation for an intracranial aneurysm at our institution between January 2014 and December 2016. We included patients with a collar sign at the initial follow-up angiogram after Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients with 285 aneurysms were screened for the collar sign on initial and subsequent follow-up angiograms. There were 226 aneurysms (79.3%) with complete occlusion at the first follow-up. Of 59 incompletely occluded aneurysms, 19 (32.2%) aneurysms in 17 patients were found to have a collar sign on the first angiographic follow-up (median, 6 months; range, 4.2-7.2). Ten (52.6%) aneurysms underwent retreatment with a second Pipeline Embolization Device, which resulted in aneurysm occlusion in 1 (10%) patient. There were only 3 (15.8%) aneurysms with complete occlusion at the last follow-up, 2 (10.5%) of which had a single Pipeline Embolization Device implantation and another single (5.3%) aneurysm with a second Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: A collar sign on the initial angiogram after Pipeline Embolization Device placement is a predictor of poor aneurysm occlusion. Because the occlusion rates remain equally low regardless of retreatment in patients with a collar sign, radiologic follow-up may be more appropriate than retreatment.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The angiographic collar sign has been recently described in patients with incompletely occluded aneurysms after Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. The long-term implications of this sign are unknown. We report angiographic outcomes of patients with the collar sign with follow-up of up to 45 months and the implications of this angiographic finding. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained data base of patients who underwent Pipeline Embolization Device implantation for an intracranial aneurysm at our institution between January 2014 and December 2016. We included patients with a collar sign at the initial follow-up angiogram after Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. RESULTS: A total of 198 patients with 285 aneurysms were screened for the collar sign on initial and subsequent follow-up angiograms. There were 226 aneurysms (79.3%) with complete occlusion at the first follow-up. Of 59 incompletely occluded aneurysms, 19 (32.2%) aneurysms in 17 patients were found to have a collar sign on the first angiographic follow-up (median, 6 months; range, 4.2-7.2). Ten (52.6%) aneurysms underwent retreatment with a second Pipeline Embolization Device, which resulted in aneurysm occlusion in 1 (10%) patient. There were only 3 (15.8%) aneurysms with complete occlusion at the last follow-up, 2 (10.5%) of which had a single Pipeline Embolization Device implantation and another single (5.3%) aneurysm with a second Pipeline Embolization Device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: A collar sign on the initial angiogram after Pipeline Embolization Device placement is a predictor of poor aneurysm occlusion. Because the occlusion rates remain equally low regardless of retreatment in patients with a collar sign, radiologic follow-up may be more appropriate than retreatment.
Authors: A Rouchaud; C Ramana; W Brinjikji; Y-H Ding; D Dai; T Gunderson; J Cebral; D F Kallmes; R Kadirvel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Miklos Marosfoi; Erin T Langan; Lara Strittmatter; Kajo van der Marel; Srinivasan Vedantham; Jennifer Arends; Ivan R Lylyk; Siddharth Loganathan; Gregory M Hendricks; Istvan Szikora; Ajit S Puri; Ajay K Wakhloo; Matthew J Gounis Journal: J Neurointerv Surg Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 5.836
Authors: C J Griessenauer; R Gupta; S Shi; A Alturki; R Motiei-Langroudi; N Adeeb; C S Ogilvy; A J Thomas Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: T Yasui; H Sakamoto; H Kishi; M Komiyama; Y Iwai; K Yamanaka; M Nishikawa; H Nakajima; Y Kobayashi; T Inoue Journal: Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) Date: 1998-12 Impact factor: 1.742
Authors: Christoph J Griessenauer; Christopher S Ogilvy; Paul M Foreman; Michelle H Chua; Mark R Harrigan; Christopher J Stapleton; Aman B Patel; Lucy He; Matthew R Fusco; J Mocco; Peter A Winkler; Apar S Patel; Ajith J Thomas Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Y Ding; D Dai; D F Kallmes; D Schroeder; C P Kealey; V Gupta; A D Johnson; R Kadirvel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 3.825