| Literature DB >> 35438564 |
Nimer Adeeb1, Mahmoud Dibas1, Jose Danilo Bengzon Diestro1, Hugo H Cuellar-Saenz1, Ahmad Sweid1, Sandeep Kandregula1, Sovann V Lay1, Adrien Guenego1, Leonardo Renieri1, Sri Hari Sundararajan1, Guillaume Saliou1, Assala Aslan1, Markus Möhlenbruch1, Justin E Vranic1, Robert W Regenhardt1, Amey Savardekar1, Ahmed Mamilly1, Ivan Lylyk1, Paul M Foreman1, Jay A Vachhani1, Vedran Župančić1, Muhammad U Hafeez1, Caleb Rutledge1, Muhammad Waqas1, Carmen Parra Farinas1, Vincent M Tutino1, Yasuaki Inoue1, Shervin Mirshahi1, James D Rabinov1, Yifan Ren1, Clemens M Schirmer1, Mariangela Piano1, Anna L Kühn1, Caterina Michelozzi1, Stéphanie Elens1, Robert M Starke1, Ameer Hassan1, Arsalaan Salehani1, Peter Sporns1, Alex Brehm1, Jesse Jones1, Marios Psychogios1, Julian Spears1, Boris Lubicz1, Pietro Panni1, Ajit S Puri1, Guglielmo Pero1, Christoph J Griessenauer1, Hamed Asadi1, Christopher J Stapleton1, Adnan Siddiqui1, Andrew F Ducruet1, Felipe C Albuquerque1, Peter Kan1, Vladimir Kalousek1, Pedro Lylyk1, Srikanth Boddu1, Jared Knopman1, Mohammad A Aziz-Sultan1, Nicola Limbucci1, Pascal Jabbour1, Christophe Cognard1, Aman B Patel1, Adam A Dmytriw1.
Abstract
Background The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device was explicitly designed for wide-neck intracranial bifurcation aneurysms. Small-scale reports have evaluated the off-label use of WEB devices for the treatment of sidewall aneurysms, with promising outcomes. Purpose To compare the angiographic and clinical outcomes of the WEB device for the treatment of sidewall aneurysms compared with the treatment of bifurcation aneurysms. Materials and Methods A retrospective review of the WorldWideWEB Consortium, a synthesis of retrospective databases spanning from January 2011 to June 2021 at 22 academic institutions in North America, South America, and Europe, was performed to identify patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the WEB device. Characteristics and outcomes were compared between bifurcation and sidewall aneurysms. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match by age, pretreatment ordinal modified Rankin Scale score, ruptured aneurysms, location of aneurysm, multiple aneurysms, prior treatment, neck, height, dome width, daughter sac, and incorporated branch. Results A total of 683 intracranial aneurysms were treated using the WEB device in 671 patients (median age, 61 years [IQR, 53-68 years]; male-to-female ratio, 1:2.5). Of those, 572 were bifurcation aneurysms and 111 were sidewall aneurysms. PSM was performed, resulting in 91 bifurcation and sidewall aneurysms pairs. No significant difference was observed in occlusion status at last follow-up, deployment success, or complication rates between the two groups. Conclusion No significantly different outcomes were observed following the off-label use of the Woven EndoBridge, or WEB, device for treatment of sidewall aneurysms compared with bifurcation aneurysms. The correct characterization of the sidewall aneurysm location, neck angle, and size is crucial for successful treatment and lower retreatment rate. © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Hetts in this issue.Entities:
Mesh：
Year: 2022 PMID： 35438564 DOI： 10.1148/radiol.212006
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiology ISSN： 0033-8419 Impact factor: 29.146