Bhogal P, Brouwer P A, Yeo L, Svensson M, Söderman M
1 Department of Neuroradiology, Karolinska University Hospital and Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
2 Neuroradiology Clinic, 40666 Klinikum Stuttgart , Stuttgart, Germany.
Interv Neuroradiol. 2018 Feb;24(1):4-13. doi: 10.1177/1591019917733125. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
Background The aim of this study was to report our single centre experience with the Medina Embolic Device (MED). Methods We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data to identify all patients treated with the MED. A total of 14 aneurysms (non-consecutive), in 13 patients, were treated including one ruptured and one partially thrombosed aneurysm. Fundus diameter was ≥5 mm in all cases. We evaluated the angiographic appearances, the clinical status, complications, and the need for adjunctive devices or repeat treatments. Results Aneurysm location was cavernous internal carotid artery (ICA; n = 1), supraclinoid ICA ( n = 1), terminal ICA ( n = 2), anterior communicating artery (AComA; n = 4), A2-3 ( n = 1), M1-2 junction ( n = 1), posterior communicating artery (PComA; n = 1), superior cerebellar artery (SCA; n = 1), and basilar tip ( n = 2). The average aneurysm fundus size was 8.6 mm (range 7-10 mm) and average neck size 3.75 mm (range 1.9-6.9 mm). Immediate angiographic results were modified Raymond-Roy occlusion classification (mRRC) I n = 2, mRRC II n = 1, mRRC IIIa n = 2, mRRC IIIb n = 2, the remaining 7 aneurysms showed complete opacification. At follow-up angiography (mean 5 months) mRRC I n = 5, mRRC II n = 5, mRRC IIIa n = 3, and persistent filling was seen in 1 aneurysm. Overall, four patients had repeat treatment and one is pending further treatment. Of the aneurysms treated with more than one MED, 75% showed complete occlusion at 6-month follow up whereas only one aneurysm treated with a single device showed complete occlusion. Overall, three patients had temporary complications and there were no deaths. Conclusions The MED is an intra-saccular flow-diverting device with satisfactory angiographic results and an acceptable safety profile. Use of a single MED cannot be recommended and further longer term studies are needed prior to widespread clinical use.
背景 本研究的目的是报告我们在单中心使用麦地那栓塞装置(MED)的经验。方法 我们对前瞻性收集的数据进行回顾性分析,以确定所有接受MED治疗的患者。共治疗了13例患者的14个动脉瘤(非连续),包括1个破裂动脉瘤和1个部分血栓形成的动脉瘤。所有病例的瘤底直径均≥5 mm。我们评估了血管造影表现、临床状况、并发症以及辅助装置的使用或重复治疗的必要性。结果 动脉瘤位置为海绵窦段颈内动脉(ICA;n = 1)、床突上段ICA(n = 1)、终末段ICA(n = 2)、前交通动脉(AComA;n = 4)、A2 - 3段(n = 1)、M1 - 2段交界处(n = 1)、后交通动脉(PComA;n = 1)、小脑上动脉(SCA;n = 1)和基底动脉尖(n = 2)。动脉瘤平均瘤底大小为8.6 mm(范围7 - 10 mm),平均瘤颈大小为3.75 mm(范围1.9 - 6.9 mm)。即刻血管造影结果为改良雷蒙德-罗伊闭塞分级(mRRC)I级n =