Roy Anil K, Grossberg Jonathan A, Osbun Joshua W, Skukalek Susana L, Howard Brian M, Ahmad Faiz U, Tong Frank, Dion Jacques E, Cawley Charles M
Department of Neurosurgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
J Neurointerv Surg. 2017 Feb;9(2):152-158. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012586. Epub 2016 Sep 5.
Carotid cavernous fistula (CCF) development after Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) treatment of cavernous carotid aneurysms (CCA) can be a challenging pathology to treat for the neurointerventionalist.
A database of all patients whose aneurysms were treated with the PED since its approval by the Food and Drug Administration in 2011 was retrospectively reviewed. Demographic information, aneurysm characteristics, treatment technique, antiplatelet regimen, and follow-up data were collected. A literature review of all papers that describe PED treatment of CCA was then completed.
A total of 44 patients with 45 CCAs were identified (38 women, 6 men). The mean age was 59.9±9.0 years. The mean maximal aneurysm diameter was 15.9±6.9 mm (mean neck 7.1±3.6 mm). A single PED was deployed in 32 patients, with two PEDs deployed in 10 patients and three PEDs in 3 patients. Adjunctive coiling was performed in 3 patients. Mean follow-up duration based on final imaging (MR angiography or digital subtraction angiography) was 14.1±12.2 months. Five patients (11.4%) developed CCFs in the post-procedural period after PED treatment, all within 2 weeks of device placement. These CCFs were treated with a balloon test occlusion followed by parent artery sacrifice. Our literature review yielded only three reports of CCFs after PED placement, with the largest series having a CCF rate of 2.3%.
CCF formation is a known risk of PED treatment of CCA. Although transvenous embolization can be used for treating CCFs, parent artery sacrifice remains a viable option on the basis of these data. Studies support the view that adjunctive coiling may have a protective effect against post-PED CCF formation. None of the coiled aneurysms in our database or in the literature have ruptured. Follow-up data will lead to a better understanding of the safety profile of the PED for CCA.
对于神经介入医生而言,使用Pipeline栓塞装置(PED)治疗海绵窦段颈内动脉瘤(CCA)后发生的颈内动脉海绵窦瘘(CCF)是一种具有挑战性的病理情况。
对自2011年该装置获美国食品药品监督管理局批准以来所有使用PED治疗动脉瘤的患者数据库进行回顾性分析。收集人口统计学信息、动脉瘤特征、治疗技术、抗血小板治疗方案及随访数据。随后完成了所有描述PED治疗CCA的文献综述。
共纳入44例患者的45个CCA(女性38例,男性6例)。平均年龄为59.9±9.0岁。动脉瘤最大平均直径为15.9±6.9mm(平均瘤颈7.1±3.6mm)。32例患者置入单个PED,10例患者置入两个PED,3例患者置入三个PED。3例患者进行了辅助性弹簧圈栓塞。基于最终影像学检查(磁共振血管造影或数字减影血管造影)的平均随访时间为14.1±12.2个月。5例患者(11.4%)在PED治疗后的术后期间发生CCF,均在装置置入后2周内。这些CCF通过球囊试验闭塞后牺牲载瘤动脉进行治疗。我们的文献综述仅发现3篇关于PED置入后发生CCF的报告,最大系列的CCF发生率为2.3%。
CCF形成是PED治疗CCA的已知风险。尽管经静脉栓塞可用于治疗CCF,但基于这些数据,牺牲载瘤动脉仍是一种可行的选择。研究支持辅助性弹簧圈栓塞可能对预防PED术后CCF形成具有保护作用的观点。我们数据库及文献中的所有弹簧圈栓塞动脉瘤均未破裂。随访数据将有助于更好地了解PED治疗CCA的安全性。