Comparison of Woven EndoBridge device sizing with conventional measurements and virtual simulation using the Sim&Size software: a multicenter experience.
aneurysm
angiography
intervention
subarachnoid
Journal
Journal of neurointerventional surgery
ISSN: 1759-8486
Titre abrégé: J Neurointerv Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101517079
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
29
10
2020
revised:
23
11
2020
accepted:
28
11
2020
pubmed:
29
12
2020
medline:
18
9
2021
entrez:
28
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Selection of the appropriate device size mandatory during aneurysm treatment with a Woven EndoBridge (WEB). We aimed to investigate if virtual simulation with Sim&Size software may have an impact on technical, angiographic, and clinical outcomes after WEB treatment. Data from two large-volume centers were collected and compared (January 2017-January 2020). Virtual simulation was systematically adopted in one center, while conventional sizing was used in the other one. Outcomes were the duration of intervention, the radiation dose (in milligrays, the number of corrective interventions for inappropriate WEB size, the number of WEBs not deployed, angiographic occlusion, and complications. Univariate and multivariate linear models were adopted. A total of 186 aneurysms were treated with WEB (109 with and 77 without virtual simulation). Patient characteristics and aneurysm features were comparable among virtual and conventional sizing, except for mean age (62.2±11.8 years and 56.2±10.1 years, P=0.0004) and median aspect ratio (1.6, IQR=1.2-2 and 1.2, IQR=1-1.6, P=0.0001). Years of operator experience were comparable. Virtual simulation was independently associated with shorter intervention time (45 min, IQR=33-63.5 min vs 63.5 min, IQR=41-84.7 min, P=0.0001), lower radiation dose (1051 mGy, IQR=815-1399 mGy vs 1207 mGy, IQR=898-2084 mGy, P=0.0001), and lower number of WEBs not deployed (26/77=33.7% vs 8/109=7.3%, P=0.0001). The need for additional maneuvers was significantly lower in the virtual simulation group (5/109=4.6% vs 12/77=15.6%, P=0.021). Angiographic outcomes and complications were comparable. In this multicenter experience, virtual simulation with Sim&Size software seems to facilitate the selection of the appropriate WEB device for aneurysm treatment, reducing the time of intervention, the radiation dose, the number of devices not deployed, and the need for corrective interventions. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04621552.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Selection of the appropriate device size mandatory during aneurysm treatment with a Woven EndoBridge (WEB). We aimed to investigate if virtual simulation with Sim&Size software may have an impact on technical, angiographic, and clinical outcomes after WEB treatment.
METHODS
METHODS
Data from two large-volume centers were collected and compared (January 2017-January 2020). Virtual simulation was systematically adopted in one center, while conventional sizing was used in the other one. Outcomes were the duration of intervention, the radiation dose (in milligrays, the number of corrective interventions for inappropriate WEB size, the number of WEBs not deployed, angiographic occlusion, and complications. Univariate and multivariate linear models were adopted.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 186 aneurysms were treated with WEB (109 with and 77 without virtual simulation). Patient characteristics and aneurysm features were comparable among virtual and conventional sizing, except for mean age (62.2±11.8 years and 56.2±10.1 years, P=0.0004) and median aspect ratio (1.6, IQR=1.2-2 and 1.2, IQR=1-1.6, P=0.0001). Years of operator experience were comparable. Virtual simulation was independently associated with shorter intervention time (45 min, IQR=33-63.5 min vs 63.5 min, IQR=41-84.7 min, P=0.0001), lower radiation dose (1051 mGy, IQR=815-1399 mGy vs 1207 mGy, IQR=898-2084 mGy, P=0.0001), and lower number of WEBs not deployed (26/77=33.7% vs 8/109=7.3%, P=0.0001). The need for additional maneuvers was significantly lower in the virtual simulation group (5/109=4.6% vs 12/77=15.6%, P=0.021). Angiographic outcomes and complications were comparable.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In this multicenter experience, virtual simulation with Sim&Size software seems to facilitate the selection of the appropriate WEB device for aneurysm treatment, reducing the time of intervention, the radiation dose, the number of devices not deployed, and the need for corrective interventions.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
BACKGROUND
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT04621552.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33361275
pii: neurintsurg-2020-017060
doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017060
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04621552']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
924-929Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.