4.6 Article

Flow Re-direction Endoluminal Device in treatment of cerebral aneurysms: initial experience with short-term follow-up results

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY
Volume 120, Issue 5, Pages 1158-1171

Publisher

AMER ASSOC NEUROLOGICAL SURGEONS
DOI: 10.3171/2014.1.JNS131442

Keywords

cerebral aneurysm; Flow Re-Direction Endoluminal Device; FRED; flow diverter; stent; vascular disorders

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Object. Flow diverter (FD) stents are relatively new and important devices in the treatment of cerebral aneurysms. The Flow Re-Direction Endoluminal Device has been recently released for clinical use. The authors' aim in this paper is to report their initial single-center FRED experience with short-term results. Methods. Between February 2012 and May 2013,33 patients with 37 aneurysms (35 unruptured and 2 previously ruptured aneurysms) were treated with the FRED. Clinical and radiological data of the patients were retrospectively reviewed. Results. In all patients only 1 device was used without any additional device or material, such as a stent or coil. All procedures were successfully performed. The procedural complication rate was 3% (1 of 33). Thirty patients underwent clinical and radiological follow-up. During the follow-up period, changes in stent morphology, such as fish mouth and foreshortening phenomena, occurred in 5 patients. The mortality and permanent morbidity rates were 0%. The complete occlusion rates were 32% (6 of 19) at 0-1 month, 67% (8 of 12) at 2-3 months, 80% (4 of 5) at 4-6 months, and 100% (8 of 8) at 7-12 months. The rates for some aneurysms were assessed at more than one time point. Conclusions. The FRED has an ability to serve neurointerventionalists in the treatment of cerebral aneurysms with its different technical advantages. The occlusion rates with FRED are similar to those with other FD devices. However, these short-term results need to be confirmed with mid- and long-term follow-up results of multicenter large series.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available