Ishii Akira, Murayama Yuichi, Nien Yih-Lin, Yuki Ichiro, Adapon P Henry, Kim Robert, Jahan Reza, Duckwiler Gary, Viñuela Fernando
Department of Neurosurgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, Japan.
Neurosurgery. 2008 Dec;63(6):1071-7; discussion 1077-9. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000334047.30589.13.
Recanalization after coil embolization of cerebral aneurysms remains a limitation of this progressively accepted modality. The Matrix detachable bioabsorbable coil (Boston Scientific Neurovascular, Natick, MA) was developed to overcome this limitation. We report a single-center experience using first- and second-generation Matrix coils.
Immediate and midterm angiographic outcomes of 235 consecutive patients with 250 aneurysms treated with Matrix coils were reviewed retrospectively. The first 16 aneurysms included in the postmarket Acceleration of Connective Tissue Formation in Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (ACTIVE) study were treated exclusively with the Matrix coil, as per protocol. The next 234 aneurysms were treated in combination with bare platinum coils, stents, and the balloon-assisted technique. First-generation Matrix coils were used in 155 aneurysms (Matrix1 group) and second-generation Matrix coils were used in 79 aneurysms (Matrix2 group). Outcomes of the 3 groups were compared.
Immediate complete obliteration was achieved in 12.5% of the ACTIVE group aneurysms, 32.9% of the Matrix1 group, and 43.0% of the Matrix2 group. Overall, 87 (34.8%) aneurysms were completely occluded acutely. Procedure-related morbidity and mortality were 2.4 and 0%, respectively. Follow-up (median, 7.9 months) angiograms were obtained for 186 (74.4%) aneurysms. Complete obliteration of aneurysms was confirmed in 26.7% of the ACTIVE group, 53.4% of the Matrix1 group, and 64.2% of the Matrix2 group. Recanalization was observed in 33.3% of the ACTIVE group, 16.9% of the Matrix1 group, and 9.4% of the Matrix2 group. The overall recanalization rate was 16.1%.
Use of Matrix2 coils resulted in improved mechanical performance and anatomic outcome compared with Matrix1 coils. However, practitioners must be familiar with the mechanical characteristics of the Matrix coils, which are different from those of bare platinum coils.
脑动脉瘤弹簧圈栓塞术后再通仍是这种逐渐被接受的治疗方式的一个局限。Matrix可脱卸生物可吸收弹簧圈(波士顿科学神经血管公司,马萨诸塞州纳蒂克)的研发旨在克服这一局限。我们报告了使用第一代和第二代Matrix弹簧圈的单中心经验。
回顾性分析235例连续患者中250个接受Matrix弹簧圈治疗的动脉瘤的即刻和中期血管造影结果。按照方案,上市后血管内动脉瘤修复中结缔组织形成加速(ACTIVE)研究纳入的前16个动脉瘤仅用Matrix弹簧圈治疗。接下来的234个动脉瘤采用裸铂弹簧圈、支架及球囊辅助技术联合治疗。155个动脉瘤使用第一代Matrix弹簧圈(Matrix1组),79个动脉瘤使用第二代Matrix弹簧圈(Matrix2组)。比较三组的结果。
ACTIVE组动脉瘤的即刻完全闭塞率为12.5%,Matrix1组为32.9%,Matrix2组为43.0%。总体而言,87个(34.8%)动脉瘤急性完全闭塞。与手术相关的发病率和死亡率分别为2.4%和0%。对186个(74.4%)动脉瘤进行了随访(中位时间7.9个月)血管造影。ACTIVE组动脉瘤的完全闭塞率为26.7%,Matrix1组为53.4%,Matrix2组为64.2%。ACTIVE组的再通率为33.3%,Matrix1组为16.9%,Matrix2组为9.4%。总体再通率为16.1%。
与Matrix1弹簧圈相比,使用Matrix2弹簧圈可改善机械性能和解剖学结果。然而,从业者必须熟悉Matrix弹簧圈的机械特性,其与裸铂弹簧圈不同。