4.4 Article

SAFE study (Safety and efficacy Analysis of FRED Embolic device in aneurysm treatment): 1-year clinical and anatomical results

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROINTERVENTIONAL SURGERY
卷 11, 期 2, 页码 184-189

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014261

关键词

-

资金

  1. MicroVention Europe

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and purpose Flow diversion is an innovative and increasingly used endovascular treatment for intracranial aneurysms. Its initial evaluation with the first devices available showed good efficacy of this treatment with variable safety results. The Flow Direction Endoluminal Device (FRED) has a specific design and was evaluated in a single-arm, multicenter, prospective, Good Clinical Practice study: SAFE (Safety and efficacy Analysis of FRED Embolic device in aneurysm treatment). This analysis reports clinical results at 1 year and anatomical results at 6 months and 1 year. Methods Patients with unruptured and recanalized aneurysms located in the anterior circulation treated with FRED and FRED Jr were prospectively included. A Clinical Event Committee and a Core Laboratory independently evaluated clinical outcome and anatomical results. Results Thirteen interventional neuroradiology centers included 103 patients/aneurysms. Aneurysm locations were supraclinoid internal carotid artery (ICA) in 71 (68.9%), cavernous ICA in 15 (14.6%), anterior cerebral or anterior communicating artery in 9 (8.7%), and middle cerebral artery in 8 (7.8%). Most aneurysms were small (< 10 mm) in 71 patients (68.9%). Cumulative 1-year mortality and morbidity rates were 2/103 (1.9%) and 3/103 (2.9%), respectively, one death being related to cancer. At 1 year, anatomical results were: complete occlusion in 66/90 patients (73.3%), neck remnant in 7/90 patients (7.8%), and aneurysm remnant in 17/90 patients (18.9%). Conclusions SA FE study analysis at 1 year confirms the excellent safety profile of the FRED device for aneurysm treatment, with low morbidity and mortality rates (2.9% and 1.9%, respectively) and demonstrates its efficacy (adequate occlusion in 73/90 (81.1%)).

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

4.4
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