共 50 条
Pipeline Embolization Device in the Treatment of Recurrent Previously Stented Cerebral Aneurysms
被引:42
|作者:
Daou, B.
[1
,2
]
Starke, R. M.
[3
]
Chalouhi, N.
[1
,2
]
Tjoumakaris, S.
[1
,2
]
Hasan, D.
[4
]
Khoury, J.
[1
,2
]
Rosenwasser, R. H.
[1
,2
]
Jabbour, P.
[1
,2
]
机构:
[1] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Dept Neurosurg, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
[2] Jefferson Hosp Neurosci, Philadelphia, PA USA
[3] Univ Virginia, Sch Med, Dept Neurol Surg, Charlottesville, VA 22908 USA
[4] Univ Iowa, Dept Neurosurg, Iowa City, IA USA
关键词:
INTRACRANIAL ANEURYSMS;
FLOW DIVERSION;
ENDOVASCULAR TREATMENT;
COILING;
RECONSTRUCTION;
D O I:
10.3174/ajnr.A4613
中图分类号:
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号:
摘要:
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The use of the Pipeline Embolization Device in the management of recurrent previously stented cerebral aneurysms is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Pipeline Embolization Device in the treatment of recurrent, previously stented aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one patients with previously stented recurrent aneurysms who later underwent Pipeline Embolization Device placement (group 1) were retrospectively identified and compared with 63 patients who had treatment with the Pipeline Embolization Device with no prior stent placement (group 2). Occlusion at the latest follow-up angiogram, recurrence and retreatment rates, clinical outcome, complications, and morbidity and mortality observed after treatment with the Pipeline Embolization Device were analyzed. RESULTS: Patient characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The mean time from stent placement to recurrence was 25 months. Pipeline Embolization Device treatment resulted in complete aneurysm occlusion in 55.6% of patients in group 1 versus 80.4% of patients in group 2 (P = .036). The retreatment rate in group 1 was 11.1% versus 7.1% in group 2 (P = .62). The rate of good clinical outcome at the latest follow-up in group 1 was 81% versus 93.2% in group 2 (P = .1). Complications were observed in 14.3% of patients in group 1 and 9.5% of patients in group 2 (P = .684). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the Pipeline Embolization Device in the management of previously stented aneurysms is less effective than the use of this device in nonstented aneurysms. Prior stent placement can worsen the safety and efficacy profile of this device.
引用
收藏
页码:849 / 855
页数:7
相关论文