This trial showed an obviously higher rate of large and giant aneurysm obliteration with the Tubridge FD over Enterprise stent-assisted coiling. However, this higher obliteration rate came at the cost of a nonsignificantly higher rate of complications. Investigational site comparisons suggested that a learning curve for flow-diverter implantation should be recognized and factored into trial designs.
IntroductionFew studies focused on predictors of unfavorable outcomes (modified Rankin Scale, 2–6) after reconstructive treatment of the ruptured intracranial spontaneous vertebral artery dissection aneurysms (ris-VADAs), which was evaluated based on 57 reconstructed lesions in this study.MethodsResults of 57 consecutive patients (M:F = 29∶28; median age, 48 years; range, 27 to 69 years) harboring 57 ris-VADAs, which were treated with coils combined with single stent(n = 32), double overlapping stents (n = 16), and triple overlapping stents (n = 9) between October 2000 to March 2011, were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed.ResultsThe available (n = 54) mean durations of angiographic and clinical follow-ups were 27 months (range, 12 to 78) and 62 months (range, 12 to 132), respectively. The involvement of PICA (p = 0.004), size of lesions (p = 0.000), quantity of stent (p = 0.001), and coil type (p = 0.002) affected the immediate obliteration grade, which was only risk factor for angiographic recurrences (p = 0.031). Although the post-treatment outcomes did not differ between single stent and multiple stents (p = 0.434), 5 angiographic recurrences, 1 rebleeding and 1 suspected rebleeding, all occurred in partial obliteration after single-stent-assisted coiling. Progressive thrombosis and in-stent obliteration were not detected on follow-up angiograms. Older age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.090; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.004–1.184; p = 0.040) and unfavorable Hunt-Hess scale (OR = 4.289; 95%CI, 1.232–14.933; p = 0.022) were independent predictors of unfavorable outcomes in the reconstructed ris-VADAs.ConclusionsImmediate obliteration grade was only risk factor for angiographic recurrence after reconstructive treatment. Unfavorable Hunt-Hess grade and older age were independent predictors of unfavorable outcomes in ris-VADAs.
PurposeTo compare the safety and efficiency of stent assisted coiling (SAC) with non-SAC for the management of ruptured intracranial aneurysms.MethodsA meta-analysis that compared SAC with coiling alone and balloon assisted coiling was conducted by database searching. The primary outcomes of this study were immediate occlusion and progressive thrombosis rate, overall perioperative complication rate, and angiographic recurrence. Secondary outcomes included mortality at discharge, hemorrhagic and ischemic complications, and favorable clinical outcome at discharge and at follow-up.ResultsEight retrospective cohort studies with 1408 ruptured intracranial aneurysms (SAC=499; non-SAC=909) were included. The SAC group tended to show a lower immediate complete occlusion rate than the non-SAC group (54.3% vs 64.2%; RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99; I2=17.4%) and achieved a significantly higher progressive complete rate at follow-up (73.4% vs 61.0%; RR 1.30; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.46; I2=40.5%) and a lower recurrence rate (4.8% vs 16.6%; RR 0.28; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.50; I2=0.0%). With respect to safety concerns, overall perioperative complications in the SAC group were significantly higher (20.2% vs 13.1%; RR 1.70; 95% CI 1.36 to 2.11; I2=0.0%). However, no significant difference was found for mortality rate at discharge (6.3% vs 6.2%; RR 1.29; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.94; I2=0.0%), or favorable clinical outcome rate at discharge (73.4% vs 74.2%; RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.88 to 1.02; I2=12.1%) and at follow-up (85.6% vs 87.9%; RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02; I2=0.0%; P=0.338).ConclusionsSAC has a lower recurrence rate than non-SAC. Nevertheless, further validation by well designed prospective studies is warranted for determining whether stents improve angiographic outcome without an increased complication rate or unfavorable clinical outcome.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.