4.5 Article

Endovascular Treatment of Cerebrovascular Lesions Using Nickel- or Nitinol-Containing Devices in Patients with Nickel Allergies

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 8, Pages 939-942

Publisher

AMER SOC NEURORADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A7936

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Nickel is commonly used in cerebral endovascular treatment devices, but the risk for patients with nickel hypersensitivity is unknown. This retrospective analysis found that treatment with nickel-containing devices in patients with nickel or metal allergies did not result in complications or symptoms of allergic reactions. Radiographic follow-up showed successful treatment outcomes without evidence of stenosis or hypersensitivity sequelae. The use of nickel-containing devices for cerebrovascular lesions was safe and effective.
Nickel is used in many cerebral endovascular treatment devices. However, nickel hypersensitivity is the most common metal allergy, and the relative risk of treatment in these patients is unknown. This retrospective analysis identified patients with nickel or metal allergies who underwent cerebral endovascular treatment with nickel-containing devices. Seven patients with nickel and/or other metal allergies underwent treatment with 9 nickel-containing devices. None experienced periprocedural complications. No patient received treatment with corticosteroids or antihistamines. At a mean clinical follow-up for all patients of 22.8 months (range, 10.5-38.0 months), no patients had symptoms attributable to nickel allergic reactions. The mean radiographic follow-up for all patients at 18.4 months (range, 2.5-37.5 months) showed successful treatment of the targeted vascular pathologies, with no evidence of in-stent stenosis or other allergic or hypersensitivity sequelae. The treatment of cerebrovascular lesions with a nickel-containing device resulted in no adverse outcomes among these patients and was safe and effective.

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