4.3 Article

Endovascular treatment of post-traumatic direct carotid-cavernous fistulas: A single-center experience

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 18, 期 1, 页码 24-28

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2010.06.008

关键词

Detachable balloons; Direct carotid-cavernous fistulas; Endovascular treatment; Trauma; Willis covered stents

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We report our single-center experience using detachable balloons (DB), coils and Willis covered stents (MicroPort, Shanghai, China) to treat post-traumatic direct carotid-cavernous fistulas (DCCFs), focusing on preservation of the internal carotid artery (ICA). We retrospectively reviewed the records of 51 patients who received endovascular treatment (EVT). EVT with DBs was chosen as the first-line therapeutic strategy, and Willis covered stent placement and coiling was the alternative. The patency and stability of all DCCFs was evaluated by angiographic and clinical follow-up for between 3 and 48 months. A total of 54 DCCFs in 51 patients were treated as follows: DB alone (n = 40); combined DB and Willis covered stent (n = 8); Willis covered stent alone (n = 2); combined DB and coils (n = 2); coils alone (n = 1); and DB in combination with both coils and a Willis covered stent (n = 1). Overall, 98% of DCCFs were successfully treated with the occlusion of the fistula and preservation of the ICA: the ICA was sacrificed in only one patient. Approximately 85% of DCCFs were successfully treated with DBs alone. Second and third administrations of EVT were required in 12 DCCFs. DCCF-related symptoms improved gradually between 1 day and 6 months after treatment. EVT using DB to occlude fistulas and preserve the ICA is the preferential treatment for DCCFs. When standard treatment has failed, coils and/or Willis covered stents can be used as a safe alternative or remedial tool with ICA preservation and reconstruction. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据