Comparison of endovascular treatment for middle cerebral artery aneurysm with a low-profile visualized intraluminal support stent or pipeline embolization device

The Safety and Efficacy of Flow Diversion versus Conventional Endovascular Treatment for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Meta-analysis of Real-world Cohort Studies from the Past 10 Years

BACKGROUND

Although the flow diverter has advantages in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms, pooled studies that directly compare it with conventional endovascular treatments are rare.

PURPOSE

Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of flow-diverter and conventional endovascular treatments in intracranial aneurysms.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a comprehensive search of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database.

STUDY SELECTION

We included only studies that directly compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of flow-diverter and conventional endovascular treatments.

DATA ANALYSIS

Random effects or fixed effects meta-analysis was used to pool the cumulative rate of short- and long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eighteen studies with 1001 patients with flow diverters and 1133 patients with conventional endovascular treatments were included; 1015 and 1201 aneurysm procedures were performed, respectively. The flow-diverter group had aneurysms of a larger size (standard mean difference, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03-0.41; P = .026). There was a higher risk of complications in the flow-diverter group compared with the conventional endovascular group (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.01-1.96; P = .045) during procedures. The follow-up angiographic results of flow-diverter treatment indicated a higher rate of complete occlusion (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.70-3.83; P < .001) and lower rates of recurrence (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.12-0.46; P < .001) and retreatment (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.21-0.47; P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include a retrospective, observational design in some studies, high heterogeneity, and selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the conventional endovascular treatments, the placement of a flow diverter may lead to more procedure-related complications, but there is no difference in safety, and it is more effective in the long term.

Hemodynamic analysis for endovascular treatment in small unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a matched comparison study of flow diverter versus LVIS

BACKGROUND

We compared the treatment of small unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) with flow diverter and LVIS-assisted coiling to determine the effects of hemodynamic changes caused by different stent and coil packing in endovascular treatment.

METHODS

Fifty-one UIAs in 51 patients treated with pipeline embolization device (PED) were included in this study and defined as the PED group. We matched controls 1:1 and enrolled 51 UIAs who were treated with LVIS stent, which were defined as the LVIS group. Computational fluid dynamics were performed to assess hemodynamic alterations between PED and LVIS. Clinical analysis was also performed between these two groups after the match.

RESULTS

There was no difference in procedural complications between the two groups (P = 0.558). At the first angiographic follow-up, the complete occlusion rate was significantly higher in the LVIS group compared with that in the PED group (98.0% vs. 82.4%, P = 0.027). However, during the further angiographic follow-up, the complete occlusion rate in the PED group achieved 100%, which was higher than that in the LVIS group (98.0%). Compared with the LVIS group after treatment, cases in the PED group showed a higher value of velocity in the aneurysm (0.03 ± 0.09 vs. 0.01 ± 0.01, P = 0.037) and WSS on the aneurysm (2.32 ± 5.40 vs. 0.33 ± 0.47, P = 0.011). Consequently, the reduction ratios of these two parameters also showed statistical differences. These parameters in the LVIS group showed much higher reduction ratios. However, the reduction ratio of the velocity on the neck plane was comparable between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both LVIS and PED were safe and effective for the treatment of small UIAs. However, LVIS-assisted coiling produced greater hemodynamic alterations in the aneurysm sac compared with PED. The hemodynamics in the aneurysm neck may be a key factor for aneurysm outcome.

Cerebral revascularization for the management of complex middle cerebral artery aneurysm: A case series

Complex middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysms, including aneurysms that are sizeable (large or giant), fusiform, wide-necked or calcified, remain a significant challenge during microsurgical clipping or endovascular coiling as treatment strategies. In the present study, a retrospective analysis of cases of this type of aneurysm treated between August 2012 and December 2019 was performed. From the hospital's database, a total of 13 patients (7 males and 6 females) with a mean age of 39.0 years (range, 13-65 years) were identified. The mean size of the aneurysms was 17.5 mm (range, 3.9-35.0 mm). A total of four patients (30.8%) had ruptured aneurysms and nine (69.2%) had unruptured aneurysms. All aneurysms were treated by proximal occlusion of the parent artery, trapping or excision combined with cerebral revascularization. The bypasses performed included 10 extracranial-intracranial bypasses and 3 intracranial-intracranial bypasses (1 end-to-end re-anastomosis, 1 interpositional graft and 1 end-to-side reimplantation). Postoperative angiography confirmed that the bypass patency was 92.3% and the clinical outcomes were indicated to be favorable, with a modified Rankin Scale score ≤2 in 12 out of 13 patients (92.3%) at the last follow-up. Taken together, the results of the present analysis suggested that treatment strategies for complex MCA aneurysms should depend on the status and characteristics of the aneurysm, including aneurysm size, location and morphology. For aneurysms that lack perforating arteries in the aneurysm dome, clip trapping or aneurysm excision with or without bypass are preferred as treatment strategies. When there are perforating arteries (particularly the lenticulostriate artery) arising from the aneurysm dome, however, the aneurysms should be treated with bypass followed by proximal occlusion of the parent artery or clip reconstruction.