Suppr超能文献

血流导向装置治疗前交通动脉复杂部位动脉瘤:我该选择哪种支架放置策略?单中心经验。

Flow diversion treatment of aneurysms of the complex region of the anterior communicating artery: which stent placement strategy should 'I' use? A single center experience.

机构信息

NEURI, Hopital Bicetre, Le Kremlin-Bicetre, France.

Neurorradiologia Intervencionista, Universidade Federal de Sao Paulo Escola Paulista de Medicina, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

出版信息

J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Nov;11(11):1118-1122. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014858. Epub 2019 Apr 11.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Aneurysms of the anterior communicating artery (ACoA) are difficult to treat with coiling or clipping because of the anatomical variation in this region. Flow diversion represents a feasible treatment, but no consensus exists as to which stent deployment technique is more suitable.

METHODS

All patients with ACoA aneurysms treated with flow diverters between April 2014 and November 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Aneurysm characteristics, follow-up results, and clinical outcome data were recorded, and a new classification comparing the diameters of both A1 segments is proposed: H1=same diameters; H2=<50% difference in diameters; H3= ≥50% difference; and Y=no A1 segment.

RESULTS

We analyzed 30 procedures in 30 patients with ACoA aneurysms, including 16 ruptured aneurysms treated with coiling embolization and 4 previously unruptured aneurysms (two Medina and two Woven EndoBridge devices). Adequate aneurysm occlusion occurred in 86.9%; one patient (3.3%) experienced symptomatic ischemic stroke. The global thromboembolic complications for each group were 17.6% (H1), 25% (H2), and 60% (H3).

CONCLUSION

Flow diversion treatment in this region is safe, feasible, and effective. The most suitable anatomical configuration for flow diverter treatment seems to be the H1 configuration where the 'I technique' is suitable (from an A1 segment to the ipsilateral A2). There is a tendency that the H3 configuration is not a good indication for flow diverter treatment. However, further studies are needed to evaluate the feasibility of this anatomical classification and the reproducibility of our findings.

摘要

背景

由于该区域的解剖结构变异,前交通动脉(ACoA)动脉瘤用线圈或夹闭治疗比较困难。血流转向代表一种可行的治疗方法,但哪种支架放置技术更适合尚无共识。

方法

回顾性分析 2014 年 4 月至 2018 年 11 月期间采用血流导向装置治疗的 ACoA 动脉瘤患者。记录动脉瘤特征、随访结果和临床转归数据,并提出一种比较双侧 A1 段直径的新分类:H1=直径相同;H2=直径差异<50%;H3=直径差异≥50%;Y=无 A1 段。

结果

我们分析了 30 例 ACoA 动脉瘤患者的 30 个手术过程,其中 16 例为破裂动脉瘤,采用线圈栓塞治疗,4 例为未破裂动脉瘤(2 例 Medina 装置和 2 例 Woven EndoBridge 装置)。86.9%的动脉瘤闭塞充分;1 例(3.3%)患者发生症状性缺血性卒中。各组总的血栓栓塞并发症发生率为 17.6%(H1)、25%(H2)和 60%(H3)。

结论

该部位的血流转向治疗是安全、可行和有效的。血流转向治疗最合适的解剖结构似乎是 H1 构型,适合采用“i 技术”(从一侧的 A1 段到同侧的 A2 段)。H3 构型似乎不适合血流转向治疗,但需要进一步研究来评估这种解剖分类的可行性和我们研究结果的可重复性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验