The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) Versus Conventional Coiling for Treatment of Patients with Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Clinical and Angiographic Outcome Data.

OBJECTIVE

Conventional coiling is standard for treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. We compared clinical and angiographic outcomes between intrasaccular flow disruption with the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) and conventional coiling in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) using a propensity score-matched analysis.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of consecutive patients with aSAH treated with the WEB or conventional coiling between 2010 and 2019. Baseline characteristics, procedural complications, angiographic results, and functional outcome were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients treated with the WEB and 236 patients treated by coiling were included. The WEB group was characterized by a higher patient age (P = 0.024), a wider aneurysm neck (P < 0.001), and more frequent location at the posterior circulation (P = 0.004). Procedural complications were comparable between WEB (19.2%) and coiling (22.7%, P = 0.447). In-hospital mortality rates were higher in the coiling group (WEB: 5.8%, coiling: 17.8%; P = 0.0034). Favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale ≤2) was obtained in 51.3% after WEB embolization and in 55.0% after coiling (P = 0.653). Retreatment was performed in 26.4% of patients after WEB and in 25.8% after coiling (P = 0.935). Propensity score analysis confirmed these results and revealed higher adequate occlusion rates at midterm follow-up for WEB-treated aneurysms (WEB: 93.9%, coiling: 76.2%, P = 0.058).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with conventional coiling, aSAH patients treated with the WEB have a similar clinical and potentially improved angiographic outcome at midterm follow-up. The WEB might be considered as an alternative to conventional coiling for the treatment of RIAs, in particular for those with wide-necked and thus challenging anatomy.