Suzuki Tomoaki, Hasegawa Hitoshi, Shibuya Kohei, Fujiwara Hidemoto, Oishi Makoto
Department of Neurosurgery, Brain Research Institute, Niigata University, 1-757 Asahimachi-Dori, Niigata 951-8585, Japan.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2024 Jun 6;14(11):1203. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14111203.
Intraprocedural rupture (IPR) during coil embolization (CE) of an intracranial aneurysm is a significant clinical concern that necessitates a comprehensive understanding of its clinical and hemodynamic predictors. Between January 2012 and December 2023, 435 saccular cerebral aneurysms were treated with CE at our institution. The inclusion criterion was extravasation or coil protrusion during CE. Postoperative data were used to confirm rupture points, and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis was performed to assess hemodynamic characteristics, focusing on maximum pressure (Pmax) and wall shear stress (WSS). IPR occurred in six aneurysms (1.3%; three ruptured and three unruptured), with a dome size of 4.7 ± 1.8 mm and a D/N ratio of 1.5 ± 0.5. There were four aneurysms in the internal carotid artery (ICA), one in the anterior cerebral artery, and one in the middle cerebral artery. ICA aneurysms were treated using adjunctive techniques (three balloon-assisted, one stent-assisted). Two aneurysms (M1M2 and A1) were treated simply, yet had relatively small and misaligned domes. CFD analysis identified the rupture point as a flow impingement zone with Pmax in five aneurysms (83.3%). Time-averaged WSS was locally reduced around this area (1.3 ± 0.7 [Pa]), significantly lower than the aneurysmal dome ( < 0.01). Hemodynamically unstable areas have fragile, thin walls with rupture risk. A microcatheter was inserted along the inflow zone, directed towards the caution area. These findings underscore the importance of identifying hemodynamically unstable areas during CE. Adjunctive techniques should be applied with caution, especially in small aneurysms with axial misalignment, to minimize the rupture risk.
颅内动脉瘤弹簧圈栓塞术(CE)过程中的术中破裂(IPR)是一个重大的临床问题,需要全面了解其临床和血流动力学预测因素。2012年1月至2023年12月期间,我院对435个囊状脑动脉瘤进行了CE治疗。纳入标准为CE期间的造影剂外渗或弹簧圈突出。术后数据用于确认破裂点,并进行计算流体动力学(CFD)分析以评估血流动力学特征,重点关注最大压力(Pmax)和壁面剪应力(WSS)。6个动脉瘤(1.3%;3个破裂,3个未破裂)发生IPR,瘤顶大小为4.7±1.8mm,D/N比为1.5±0.5。颈内动脉(ICA)有4个动脉瘤,大脑前动脉有1个,大脑中动脉有1个。ICA动脉瘤采用辅助技术治疗(3个球囊辅助,1个支架辅助)。2个动脉瘤(M1M2和A1)单纯治疗,但瘤顶相对较小且位置不正。CFD分析确定5个动脉瘤(83.3%)的破裂点为Pmax的血流冲击区。该区域周围的时间平均WSS局部降低(1.3±0.7[Pa]),显著低于动脉瘤瘤顶(<0.01)。血流动力学不稳定区域的壁脆弱、薄,有破裂风险。将微导管沿流入区插入,指向警示区。这些发现强调了在CE期间识别血流动力学不稳定区域的重要性。应谨慎应用辅助技术,尤其是在瘤顶轴向不正的小动脉瘤中,以尽量降低破裂风险。