Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Oct 8.
doi: 10.1227/neu.0000000000003188. Online ahead of print.

Lower-Ischemic-Risk Profile of Coated Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device X Compared With Uncoated Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device Flow Diverter in the Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms

Affiliations

Lower-Ischemic-Risk Profile of Coated Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device X Compared With Uncoated Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device Flow Diverter in the Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms

Lukas Goertz et al. Neurosurgery. .

Abstract

Background and objectives: Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED) X is a new generation flow diverter with an antithrombotic surface coating. This study compares the procedural safety and short-term efficacy of FRED X with its uncoated predecessor, the FRED.

Methods: Patients treated with FRED and FRED X devices for unruptured aneurysms between 2013 and 2023 at 3 neurovascular centers were retrospectively reviewed. The procedural ischemic event rate was the safety end point, and the complete aneurysm occlusion rate at 1 year was the efficacy end point. Multivariable regression adjustment and 1:1 propensity score matching were performed to control for potential confounding.

Results: The FRED X group (137 patients) had a higher prevalence of recurrent and bifurcation aneurysms and fewer aneurysms with branch involvement than the FRED X group (156 patients). The ischemic event rate was lower in FRED X (1/156 [0.6%]) than in FRED (7/137 [5.1%]), which was significant after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio: 8.8, 95% CI: 1.1-72.7, P = .04), and tended to be significant in the propensity score analysis (P = .07). Morbidity was comparable between FRED (2.2%) and FRED X (0%, P = .10). The complete occlusion rates of FRED vs FRED X were 73/117 (62.4%) vs 39/54 (72.2%) aneurysms at 6 months (P = .21) and 52/74 (70.3%) vs 27/37 (73.0%) at 12 months (P = .77). Hemorrhagic complications, in-stent stenosis, and clinical events during follow-up and retreatments were not significantly different between groups.

Conclusion: This study indicates an improved ischemic risk profile of FRED X while maintaining a favorable efficacy profile, warranting further study and translation into clinical use.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Kallmes DF, Hanel R, Lopes D, et al. International retrospective study of the pipeline embolization device: a multicenter aneurysm treatment study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(1):108-115.
    1. Brinjikji W, Murad MH, Lanzino G, et al. Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2013;44(2):442-447.
    1. Chiu A, Cheung A, Wenderoth J, et al. Long-term follow-up results following elective treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms with the pipeline embolization device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(9):1728-1734.
    1. Starke RM, Thompson J, Pagani A, et al. Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the pipeline vantage embolization device with shield technology. J Neurointerv Surg. 2020;12(10):981-986.
    1. Yoshizawa K, Kobayashi H, Kaneki A, et al. Poly (2-methoxyethyl acrylate)(PMEA) improves the thromboresistance of FRED flow diverters: a thrombogenic evaluation of flow diverters with human blood under flow conditions. J Neurointerv Surg. 2023;15(10):1001-1006.

LinkOut - more resources