Department of Neurosurgery, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Department of Neurosurgery, 23564Gates Vascular Institute at Kaleida Health, Buffalo, New York, USA.
Interv Neuroradiol. 2021 Feb;27(1):68-74. doi: 10.1177/1591019920938961. Epub 2020 Jul 5.
Transradial access for neurointerventions offers advantages of fewer access-site complications, reduced procedure time, and greater patient comfort over transfemoral access. Data about transradial access for flow diversion are limited. We share our early experience with transradial access for flow diversion in a relatively large case series.
Consecutive patients who underwent Pipeline embolization device (Medtronic) deployment via transradial access were included in the study, irrespective of location and laterality of the intracranial aneurysm. The cases were performed between July 2016 and October 2019. Demographics, aneurysm characteristics, and procedure-related details (including catheter systems used) were recorded and statistically evaluated.
Thirty-five transradial flow diversion procedures were attempted in 32 patients, of which 33 procedures were successful. In two cases involving left common carotid artery and internal carotid artery access, guide catheter herniation into the aortic arch led to abandonment of transradial access in favor of transfemoral access. The most common aneurysm locations in the transradial access procedures were the posterior communicating artery ( = 7), ophthalmic artery ( = 7), and superior hypophyseal artery ( = 7). Most transradial access procedures (66.7%) were performed using a biaxial catheter system. 6-French Benchmark (Penumbra) and Phenom 27 Medtronic) were the most commonly utilized guide- and microcatheters, respectively. One patient had intraprocedural subarachnoid hemorrhage. No access-site complications occurred.
This study demonstrates safety and feasibility of transradial access for Pipeline embolization device deployment and shows the versatility of this approach for different catheter systems. Tortuosity and acute angulation of the left common carotid artery and internal carotid artery were associated with approach failure.
与经股动脉入路相比,神经介入经桡动脉入路具有减少入路部位并发症、缩短手术时间和提高患者舒适度等优势。关于血流导向装置经桡动脉入路的相关数据有限。我们分享了经桡动脉入路在相对较大的病例系列中进行血流导向装置治疗的早期经验。
本研究纳入了通过经桡动脉入路行 Pipeline 栓塞装置(美敦力)置入的连续患者,无论颅内动脉瘤的位置和侧别如何。这些病例均于 2016 年 7 月至 2019 年 10 月期间进行。记录了患者的人口统计学资料、动脉瘤特征和与手术相关的细节(包括使用的导管系统),并进行了统计学评估。
32 例患者中共有 35 例尝试经桡动脉血流导向装置治疗,其中 33 例手术成功。在 2 例涉及左侧颈总动脉和颈内动脉入路的病例中,导引导管疝入主动脉弓导致改行经股动脉入路。经桡动脉入路治疗的最常见动脉瘤部位为后交通动脉( = 7)、眼动脉( = 7)和垂体上动脉( = 7)。大多数经桡动脉入路手术(66.7%)使用双轴导管系统。6-French Benchmark(Penumbra)和 Phenom 27 (美敦力)是最常使用的导引导管和微导管。1 例患者术中发生蛛网膜下腔出血。无入路部位并发症发生。
本研究表明经桡动脉入路行 Pipeline 栓塞装置置入是安全可行的,同时证明了该方法对于不同导管系统的多功能性。左侧颈总动脉和颈内动脉的迂曲和锐角与入路失败有关。