4.7 Article

Flow Diverters at and Beyond the Level of the Circle of Willis for the Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms

Journal

STROKE
Volume 43, Issue 4, Pages 1032-1038

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.636019

Keywords

aneurysm; intracranial circle of Willis; endovascular procedures

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose-Flow Diverters (FD) are a new emerging therapy for intracranial aneurysms. Initial reports focused on the treatment of proximally located aneurysms. We report our experience with FDs in the treatment of aneurysms at and beyond the circle of Willis. Methods-We treated 30 aneurysms at and beyond the circle of Willis with FDs (silk and pipeline). Aneurysms were treated with FDs alone in 73.3% (22/30) and with FDs and coils in 23.3% (7/30). One procedure was converted in parent vessel occlusion. Results-Thirty aneurysms (21/30, 70.0% saccular; 7/30, 23.3% fusiform; 2/30, 6.7% blister-like; sizes 1.2-19.6, mean 6.8 mm) were treated in 26 patients (17 women, 9 men; mean age, 49 years) during 27 procedures. Access site complication was noted in 3.7% (1/27). Reversible neurological complications were noted in 7.4% (2/27), permanent neurological complication in 3.7% (1/27). There was no mortality. No aneurysms bled or rebled after treatment. Aneurysms treated with FDs alone were significantly smaller than those treated with FDs and coils (5.7 and 10.0 mm, respectively; P=0.0174). Immediate angiographic occlusion was achieved in 18.2% (4/22) with FDs alone, in 0.0% (0/7) with FDs and coils. Twenty-four aneurysms (80.0%) had been followed (mean, 13 months). Fifteen of 19 aneurysms (78.9%) treated with FDs against 4 of 4 of aneurysms (100%) treated with FDs and coils were occluded. There was no angiographic recurrence of initially totally occluded aneurysms. Conclusions-Aneurysms at and beyond the circle of Willis are amenable to selective treatment with FDs. (Stroke. 2012; 43:1032-1038.)

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available