Department of Neurosurgery, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi-Do, Korea.
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2024 May 15;166(1):216. doi: 10.1007/s00701-024-06117-8.
Despite growing evidence for the effectiveness of stent-assisted coil embolization (SAC) in treating acutely ruptured aneurysms, the safety of stent placement in acute phase remains controversial because of concerns for stent-induced thromboembolism and hemorrhagic events attributable to the necessity of antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, we investigated the safety and efficacy of SAC with periprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compared with the coiling-only technique to determine whether it is a promising treatment strategy for ruptured aneurysms.
We retrospectively evaluated 203 enrolled patients with acutely ruptured aneurysms, categorizing them into two groups: SAC and coiling-only groups. Comparative analyses between the two groups regarding angiographic results, clinical outcomes, and procedure-related complications were performed. A subgroup analysis of procedural complications was conducted on patients who did not receive chronic antithrombotic medications to alleviate their influence before hospitalization.
130 (64.0%) patients were treated using the coiling-only technique, whereas 73 (36.0%) underwent SAC. There was a trend to a higher complete obliteration rate (p = 0.061) and significantly lower recanalization rate (p = 0.030) at angiographic follow-up in the SAC group compared to the coiling-only group. Postprocedural cerebral infarction occurred less frequently in the SAC group (8.2%) than in the coiling-only group (17.7%), showing a significant difference (p = 0.044). Although the ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage rate was significantly higher in the SAC group than in the coiling-only group (26.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.031), the incidence of symptomatic ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage was comparable. Subgroup analysis excluding patients receiving chronic antithrombotic medications showed similar results.
SAC with periprocedural DAPT could be a safe and effective treatment strategy for acutely ruptured aneurysms. Moreover, it might have a protective effect on postprocedural cerebral infarction without increasing the risk of symptomatic hemorrhagic complications.
尽管支架辅助线圈栓塞术(SAC)在治疗急性破裂动脉瘤方面的有效性证据不断增加,但由于对支架诱导的血栓形成和出血事件的担忧,支架置入在急性期的安全性仍存在争议,这归因于抗血小板治疗的必要性。因此,我们研究了在围手术期进行双重抗血小板治疗(DAPT)的 SAC 的安全性和有效性,与单纯线圈栓塞技术进行比较,以确定它是否是一种有前途的破裂动脉瘤治疗策略。
我们回顾性评估了 203 名急性破裂动脉瘤患者,将他们分为 SAC 组和单纯线圈栓塞组。对两组之间的血管造影结果、临床结局和与手术相关的并发症进行了比较分析。对未接受慢性抗血栓药物治疗的患者进行了手术并发症亚组分析,以减轻其在住院前的影响。
130 例(64.0%)患者采用单纯线圈栓塞技术治疗,73 例(36.0%)患者采用 SAC 治疗。SAC 组的完全闭塞率有升高趋势(p=0.061),再通率明显低于单纯线圈栓塞组(p=0.030)。SAC 组术后脑梗死发生率低于单纯线圈栓塞组(8.2% vs. 17.7%,p=0.044),差异有统计学意义。虽然 SAC 组的脑室造瘘相关出血率明显高于单纯线圈栓塞组(26.2% vs. 9.3%,p=0.031),但症状性脑室造瘘相关出血的发生率相似。排除接受慢性抗血栓药物治疗的患者的亚组分析显示出类似的结果。
围手术期进行 DAPT 的 SAC 可能是治疗急性破裂动脉瘤的一种安全有效的治疗策略。此外,它可能对术后脑梗死有保护作用,而不会增加症状性出血并发症的风险。