Endovascular treatment of cerebral dural arteriovenous fistulas with SQUID 12.
EVOH
SQUID
cerebral dural arteriovenous fistula
embolic agent
endovascular embolization
Journal
Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences
ISSN: 2385-2011
Titre abrégé: Interv Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9602695
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2020
Oct 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
28
8
2020
medline:
6
7
2021
entrez:
27
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Endovascular therapy with liquid embolic agents (LEAs) is the gold standard for the treatment of cerebral dural arteriovenous fistulas (cDAVFs). The aim of the study is to retrospectively evaluate effectiveness, safety, and midterm follow-up results of endovascular treatment of cDAVFs using SQUID 12. Between June 2017 and January 2020 the authors retrospectively reviewed clinical, demographic and embolization data of 19 consecutive patients with cDAVF who underwent embolization using SQUID 12. The number of arteries catheterized for each procedure, the total amount of embolic agent, the occlusion rate, the injection time, any technical and/or clinical complications were recorded. Mid-term follow-up with DSA was reviewed. 20 procedures were performed in 19 patients. A transarterial approach was accomplished in 19 procedure; a combined transvenous-transarterial approach was realized in 1 treatment. The average time of injection was 33 minutes (2-82 minutes), and the average amount of SQUID 12 was 2.8 mL (0.5-6 mL). Complete angiographic cure at the end of the procedure was achieved in 17 patients. No major periprocedural adverse events were recorded. Mid-term follow-up was achieved in 15 out of 19 patients and confirmed complete occlusion of the cDAVFs in 13/15 patients (87%); in 2 of the initially cured patients a small relapse was detected. The treatment of the cDAVFs using SQUID 12 was effective and safe. The lower viscosity seems to allow an easier penetration of the agent with a high rate of complete occlusion of the cDAVFs.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Endovascular therapy with liquid embolic agents (LEAs) is the gold standard for the treatment of cerebral dural arteriovenous fistulas (cDAVFs). The aim of the study is to retrospectively evaluate effectiveness, safety, and midterm follow-up results of endovascular treatment of cDAVFs using SQUID 12.
METHODS
METHODS
Between June 2017 and January 2020 the authors retrospectively reviewed clinical, demographic and embolization data of 19 consecutive patients with cDAVF who underwent embolization using SQUID 12. The number of arteries catheterized for each procedure, the total amount of embolic agent, the occlusion rate, the injection time, any technical and/or clinical complications were recorded. Mid-term follow-up with DSA was reviewed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
20 procedures were performed in 19 patients. A transarterial approach was accomplished in 19 procedure; a combined transvenous-transarterial approach was realized in 1 treatment. The average time of injection was 33 minutes (2-82 minutes), and the average amount of SQUID 12 was 2.8 mL (0.5-6 mL). Complete angiographic cure at the end of the procedure was achieved in 17 patients. No major periprocedural adverse events were recorded. Mid-term follow-up was achieved in 15 out of 19 patients and confirmed complete occlusion of the cDAVFs in 13/15 patients (87%); in 2 of the initially cured patients a small relapse was detected.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The treatment of the cDAVFs using SQUID 12 was effective and safe. The lower viscosity seems to allow an easier penetration of the agent with a high rate of complete occlusion of the cDAVFs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32842833
doi: 10.1177/1591019920954095
pmc: PMC7645197
doi:
Substances chimiques
Polyvinyls
0
ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer
25067-34-9
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
651-657Références
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008 Feb;29(2):235-41
pubmed: 17989374
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Dec;40(12):2130-2136
pubmed: 31753837
J Neurosurg. 2018 Nov 1;129(5):1114-1119
pubmed: 29243979
J Neurosurg. 1999 Jan;90(1):78-84
pubmed: 10413159
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012 Jun;33(6):1007-13
pubmed: 22241393
Neurosurgery. 2018 Jun 1;82(6):854-863
pubmed: 29351648
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2018 Sep;39(9):1696-1702
pubmed: 30093480
Interv Neuroradiol. 2018 Dec;24(6):706-712
pubmed: 29973081
Turk Neurosurg. 2014;24(4):565-70
pubmed: 25050683
J Neurosurg. 1995 Feb;82(2):166-79
pubmed: 7815143
World Neurosurg. 2017 Nov;107:1050.e1-1050.e7
pubmed: 28826865
Turk Neurosurg. 2016;26(4):518-24
pubmed: 27400097
World Neurosurg. 2010 Apr;73(4):365-79
pubmed: 20849795
J Neurointerv Surg. 2011 Mar;3(1):5-13
pubmed: 21990779
Radiology. 1995 Mar;194(3):671-80
pubmed: 7862961
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Jul;11(7):706-709
pubmed: 30567844
J Neurointerv Surg. 2013 Jul;5(4):306-10
pubmed: 22550096
J Neurosurg. 2017 Jun;126(6):1884-1893
pubmed: 27588586
Interv Neuroradiol. 2018 Dec;24(6):693-701
pubmed: 29973083
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jan;38(1):127-131
pubmed: 27932510
J Neurosurg. 2008 Dec;109(6):1083-90
pubmed: 19035723
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008 Jan;29(1):91-7
pubmed: 17974618