4.5 Article

Pipeline Flow-Diverter Stent for Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: Preliminary Experience in 20 Patients with 27 Aneurysms

Journal

WORLD NEUROSURGERY
Volume 76, Issue 1-2, Pages 114-119

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.02.015

Keywords

Aneurysms; Stent

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To report our preliminary experience with the Pipeline flow-diverter stent for the endovascular treatment (EVT) of intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: Between September 2009 and October 2010, 20 patients with 27 fusiform or wide-necked unruptured aneurysms were included and treated by Pipeline stent placement alone. Technical issues, immediate findings, delayed complications, and clinical and imaging follow-up at three and six months were assessed. RESULTS: EVT was successfully performed in all patients. Clinical outcome was excellent in all but one patient who died. This latter patient developed a massive infarct due to a delayed stent thrombosis. Other complications without permanent deficit included one perimesencephalic subarachnoid hemorrhage and one retroperitoneal hematoma. Minor technical issues without clinical consequence were encountered in nine patients and included stent migration, stent misplacement, unanticipated stent shortening, and the impossibility to recapture the distal coil tip of the supporting device. Angiographic follow-up in 19 patients with 25 aneurysms showed 21 complete occlusions, one neck remnant, and three incomplete occlusions. No significant parent artery stenosis was seen. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the Pipeline stent is useful for EVT of fusiform and wide-necked intracranial aneurysms. Moreover, the stent is well tolerated with a low rate of intra-stent stenosis at short-term follow-up. However, technical improvements are needed to ensure safe and precise use of the device.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available