Endovascular Treatment of Small and Very Small Intracranial Aneurysms with the Woven EndoBridge Device.
Journal
AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology
ISSN: 1936-959X
Titre abrégé: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8003708
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2021
07 2021
Historique:
received:
19
11
2020
accepted:
11
01
2021
pubmed:
1
5
2021
medline:
13
10
2021
entrez:
30
4
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The Woven EndoBridge has proved to be a safe and effective treatment, especially for wide-neck intracranial aneurysms. The recent fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge came with smaller devices. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficiency of Woven EndoBridge treatment of small and very small aneurysms. Between September 2017 and March 2020, all consecutive patients treated with a 3- or 3.5 mm-width Woven EndoBridge device were included in this retrospective intention-to-treat study. Clinical and radiologic findings were evaluated at immediate and last-available follow-up. Angiographic outcome was assessed by an external expert reader. One hundred twenty-eight aneurysms were treated with a fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge device including 29 with a width of ≤3.5 mm. Ten aneurysms were ruptured (34%). In 3 cases (10%), Woven EndoBridge treatment could not be performed because the aneurysm was still too small for the smallest available Woven EndoBridge device and another endovascular strategy was chosen. The median follow-up time was 11.2 months. Complete and adequate occlusion was obtained in 71% and 90% of the treated aneurysms, respectively. Retreatment was needed in 2 cases (10%). Symptomatic ischemic complications leading to transient neurologic deficits occurred in 2 cases (7%) (1 procedure-related and 1 device-related) but with full spontaneous recovery at discharge. The fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge device seems to be a safe and technically feasible treatment for both ruptured and unruptured small and very small intracranial aneurysms, with satisfactory occlusion rates on midterm follow-up. However, further study is needed to evaluate longer-term efficiency.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Woven EndoBridge has proved to be a safe and effective treatment, especially for wide-neck intracranial aneurysms. The recent fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge came with smaller devices. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficiency of Woven EndoBridge treatment of small and very small aneurysms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Between September 2017 and March 2020, all consecutive patients treated with a 3- or 3.5 mm-width Woven EndoBridge device were included in this retrospective intention-to-treat study. Clinical and radiologic findings were evaluated at immediate and last-available follow-up. Angiographic outcome was assessed by an external expert reader.
RESULTS
One hundred twenty-eight aneurysms were treated with a fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge device including 29 with a width of ≤3.5 mm. Ten aneurysms were ruptured (34%). In 3 cases (10%), Woven EndoBridge treatment could not be performed because the aneurysm was still too small for the smallest available Woven EndoBridge device and another endovascular strategy was chosen. The median follow-up time was 11.2 months. Complete and adequate occlusion was obtained in 71% and 90% of the treated aneurysms, respectively. Retreatment was needed in 2 cases (10%). Symptomatic ischemic complications leading to transient neurologic deficits occurred in 2 cases (7%) (1 procedure-related and 1 device-related) but with full spontaneous recovery at discharge.
CONCLUSIONS
The fifth-generation Woven EndoBridge device seems to be a safe and technically feasible treatment for both ruptured and unruptured small and very small intracranial aneurysms, with satisfactory occlusion rates on midterm follow-up. However, further study is needed to evaluate longer-term efficiency.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33926902
pii: ajnr.A7115
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A7115
pmc: PMC8324278
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1276-1281Informations de copyright
© 2021 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.
Références
Neurosurgery. 2011 Oct;69(4):837-41; discussion 842
pubmed: 21623247
N Engl J Med. 2012 Jun 28;366(26):2474-82
pubmed: 22738097
Neuroradiology. 2016 Sep;58(9):887-91
pubmed: 27312475
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013 Jun-Jul;34(6):1209-14
pubmed: 23292529
Lancet. 2005 Sep 3-9;366(9488):809-17
pubmed: 16139655
J Neurosurg. 2016 May;124(5):1250-6
pubmed: 26381253
J Neurosurg. 2019 Jan 25;:1-10
pubmed: 30684948
JAMA Neurol. 2018 Jan 1;75(1):27-34
pubmed: 29159405
Stroke. 2014 Jul;45(7):1958-63
pubmed: 24851875
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 May;11(5):511-515
pubmed: 30655358
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017 Jan;159(1):93-100
pubmed: 27844157
Neurosurgery. 2020 Aug 1;87(2):357-367
pubmed: 31960052
World Neurosurg. 2019 Feb;122:e498-e505
pubmed: 30394356
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 May;37(5):862-7
pubmed: 26721770
Neuroradiology. 2014 Sep;56(9):755-61
pubmed: 24930127
World Neurosurg. 2021 Feb;146:e631-e638
pubmed: 33152491
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009 Sep;30(8):1513-7
pubmed: 19461057
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Sep;11(9):924-930
pubmed: 30992395
J Neurosurg. 2008 Jun;108(6):1088-92
pubmed: 18518708
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Oct;40(10):1766-1772
pubmed: 31488499
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2017 Jul;60(4):424-432
pubmed: 28689391
World Neurosurg. 2020 Apr;136:17-27
pubmed: 31899398
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014 Jul;35(7):1353-7
pubmed: 24524918
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2017 Jun;38(6):1151-1155
pubmed: 28450432
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2016 Apr;37(4):655-9
pubmed: 26514608
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015 Dec;36(12):2320-4
pubmed: 26294645
Stroke. 2008 Sep;39(9):2497-504
pubmed: 18617659