Enriquez-Marulanda Alejandro, Salem Mohamed M, Ascanio Luis C, Maragkos Georgios A, Gupta Raghav, Moore Justin M, Thomas Ajith J, Ogilvy Christopher S, Alturki Abdulrahman Y
1 Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
2 Department of Neurosurgery, The National Neuroscience Institute, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Neuroradiol J. 2019 Oct;32(5):344-352. doi: 10.1177/1971400919845368. Epub 2019 Apr 18.
Aneurysms arising from the communicating segment (C7) of the internal carotid artery (ICA) are one of the most frequent locations of intracranial aneurysms. Stent-assisted coiling (SAC) and flow diversion therapies are both endovascular strategies used for the treatment of ICA aneurysms occurring at the C7 segment.
The aim of this study is to compare both methods' angiographic and functional outcomes, and procedural complications. To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare both modalities for aneurysms at this location.
A retrospective review was performed of our prospectively collected database from 2008 until 2017 for patients treated with SAC and from 2013 until 2017 for patients treated with pipeline embolization devices (PEDs).
We identified 35 patients for this cohort with 38 aneurysms; 17 treated with SAC and 21 with PED. Mean age was 59 years, and 30 patients were female (86%). Complete occlusion at last follow-up occurred in 70.6% of patients in the SAC group and in 81% in the PED group ( = 0.45). Posterior communicating artery patency at last follow-up did not differ significantly between the two groups (94.1% vs 85.7%; = 0.40). Good functional outcome at last follow-up (mRS 0-2) was achieved in 100% and 88.2% of patients, respectively. Additionally, there was no significant difference between the two groups for retreatment rates, procedural hemorrhagic, or thromboembolic complications.
SAC and PED are two equally efficacious modalities for endovascular treatment of ICA aneurysms arising at the communicating segment of the ICA.
起源于颈内动脉(ICA)交通段(C7)的动脉瘤是颅内动脉瘤最常见的部位之一。支架辅助弹簧圈栓塞术(SAC)和血流导向治疗都是用于治疗发生在C7段的ICA动脉瘤的血管内治疗策略。
本研究的目的是比较这两种方法的血管造影和功能结果以及手术并发症。据我们所知,这是第一项比较这两种治疗方式用于该部位动脉瘤的研究。
对我们前瞻性收集的数据库进行回顾性分析,该数据库涵盖2008年至2017年接受SAC治疗的患者以及2013年至2017年接受Pipeline栓塞装置(PED)治疗的患者。
我们确定了该队列中的35例患者,共38个动脉瘤;17例接受SAC治疗,21例接受PED治疗。平均年龄为59岁,30例患者为女性(86%)。SAC组70.6%的患者在最后一次随访时实现完全闭塞,PED组为81%(P = 0.45)。两组在最后一次随访时后交通动脉通畅率无显著差异(94.1%对85.7%;P = 0.40)。最后一次随访时功能良好(改良Rankin量表评分0 - 2分)的患者分别为100%和88.2%。此外,两组在再治疗率、手术出血或血栓栓塞并发症方面无显著差异。
SAC和PED是血管内治疗起源于ICA交通段的ICA动脉瘤的两种同样有效的方式。