Comparative Efficacy of Flow Diverter Devices in the Treatment of Carotid Sidewall Intracranial Aneurysms: a Retrospective, Multicenter Study
- PMID: 39023541
- DOI: 10.1007/s00062-024-01435-x
Comparative Efficacy of Flow Diverter Devices in the Treatment of Carotid Sidewall Intracranial Aneurysms: a Retrospective, Multicenter Study
Abstract
Background: The comparative efficacy and safety of first-generation flow diverters (FDs), Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) (Medtronic, Irvine, California), Silk (Balt Extrusion, Montmorency, France), Flow Re-direction Endoluminal Device (FRED) (Microvention, Tustin, California), and Surpass Streamline (Stryker Neurovascular, Fremont, California), is not directly established and largely inferred.
Purpose: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different FDs in treating sidewall ICA intracranial aneurysms.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from eighteen academic institutions from 2009-2016, comprising 444 patients treated with one of four devices for sidewall ICA aneurysms. Data on demographics, aneurysm characteristics, treatment outcomes, and complications were analyzed. Angiographic and clinical outcomes were assessed using various imaging modalities and modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Propensity score weighting was employed to balance confounding variables. The data analysis used Kaplan-Meier curves, logistic regression, and Cox proportional-hazards regression.
Results: While there were no significant differences in retreatment rates, functional outcomes (mRS 0-1), and thromboembolic complications between the four devices, the probability of achieving adequate occlusion at the last follow-up was highest in Surpass device (HR: 4.59; CI: 2.75-7.66, p < 0.001), followed by FRED (HR: 2.23; CI: 1.44-3.46, p < 0.001), PED (HR: 1.72; CI: 1.10-2.70, p = 0.018), and Silk (HR: 1.0 ref. standard). The only hemorrhagic complications were with Surpass (1%).
Conclusion: All the first-generation devices achieved good clinical outcomes and retreatment rates in treating ICA sidewall aneurysms. Prospective studies are needed to explore the nuanced differences between these devices in the long term.
Keywords: Flow Diverter Devices; Hemorrhagic Complications; Intracranial Aneurysms; Modified Rankin Scale; Pipeline Emboliza on Device; Thromboembolic Complications.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.
Conflict of interest statement
References
-
- Musmar B, Adeeb N, Ansari J, Sharma P, Cuellar HH. Endovascular Management of Hemorrhagic Stroke. Biomedicines. 2022;10(1):100. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10010100 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Brinjikji W, Rabinstein AA, Nasr DM, Lanzino G, Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ. Better outcomes with treatment by coiling relative to clipping of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the United States, 2001–2008. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(6):1071–5. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2453 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Gory B, Turjman F. Endovascular treatment of 404 intracranial aneurysms treated with nexus detachable coils: short-term and mid-term results from a prospective, consecutive, European multicenter study. Acta Neurochir (wien). 2014;156(5):831–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-014-2047-3 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Molyneux AJ, Kerr RSC, Birks J, et al. Risk of recurrent subarachnoid haemorrhage, death, or dependence and standardised mortality ratios after clipping or coiling of an intracranial aneurysm in the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT): long-term follow-up. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(5):427–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70080-8
-
- Brown RD, Broderick JP. Unruptured intracranial aneurysms: epidemiology, natural history, management options, and familial screening. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13(4):393–404. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(14)70015-8
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous