Cargando…
Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study
BACKGROUND: The first and second generations of the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) have been widely adopted for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms (IAs) due to their high associated occlusion rates and low morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7569365/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32482834 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015943 |
_version_ | 1783596715375329280 |
---|---|
author | Rice, Hal Martínez Galdámez, Mario Holtmannspötter, Markus Spelle, Laurent Lagios, Konstantinos Ruggiero, Maria Vega, Pedro Sonwalkar, Hemant Chapot, René Lamin, Saleh |
author_facet | Rice, Hal Martínez Galdámez, Mario Holtmannspötter, Markus Spelle, Laurent Lagios, Konstantinos Ruggiero, Maria Vega, Pedro Sonwalkar, Hemant Chapot, René Lamin, Saleh |
author_sort | Rice, Hal |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The first and second generations of the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) have been widely adopted for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms (IAs) due to their high associated occlusion rates and low morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the third- generation Pipeline Shield device (PED-Shield) for the treatment of IAs. METHODS: The SHIELD study was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter, post-market, observational study evaluating the PED-Shield device for the treatment of IAs. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete aneurysm occlusion without significant parent artery stenosis or retreatment at 1-year post-procedure and the primary safety endpoint was major stroke in the territory supplied by the treated artery or neurological death. RESULTS: Of 205 subjects who consented across 21 sites, 204 subjects with 204 target aneurysms were ultimately treated (mean age 54.8±12.81 years, 81.4% [166/204] female). Technical success (ie, deployment of the PED-Shield) was achieved in 98.0% (200/204) of subjects with a mean number of 1.1±0.34 devices per subject and a single device used in 86.8% (177/204) of subjects. The primary effectiveness endpoint was met in 71.7% (143/200) of subjects while the primary safety endpoint occurred in six (2.9%) subjects, two (1.0%) of which led to neurological death. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the SHIELD study support the safety and effectiveness of the PED-Shield for IA treatment, evidenced by high occlusion rates and low rates of neurological complications in the study population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02719522. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7569365 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75693652020-10-20 Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study Rice, Hal Martínez Galdámez, Mario Holtmannspötter, Markus Spelle, Laurent Lagios, Konstantinos Ruggiero, Maria Vega, Pedro Sonwalkar, Hemant Chapot, René Lamin, Saleh J Neurointerv Surg Hemorrhagic Stroke BACKGROUND: The first and second generations of the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) have been widely adopted for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms (IAs) due to their high associated occlusion rates and low morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the third- generation Pipeline Shield device (PED-Shield) for the treatment of IAs. METHODS: The SHIELD study was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter, post-market, observational study evaluating the PED-Shield device for the treatment of IAs. The primary efficacy endpoint was complete aneurysm occlusion without significant parent artery stenosis or retreatment at 1-year post-procedure and the primary safety endpoint was major stroke in the territory supplied by the treated artery or neurological death. RESULTS: Of 205 subjects who consented across 21 sites, 204 subjects with 204 target aneurysms were ultimately treated (mean age 54.8±12.81 years, 81.4% [166/204] female). Technical success (ie, deployment of the PED-Shield) was achieved in 98.0% (200/204) of subjects with a mean number of 1.1±0.34 devices per subject and a single device used in 86.8% (177/204) of subjects. The primary effectiveness endpoint was met in 71.7% (143/200) of subjects while the primary safety endpoint occurred in six (2.9%) subjects, two (1.0%) of which led to neurological death. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of the SHIELD study support the safety and effectiveness of the PED-Shield for IA treatment, evidenced by high occlusion rates and low rates of neurological complications in the study population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02719522. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-11 2020-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7569365/ /pubmed/32482834 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015943 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Hemorrhagic Stroke Rice, Hal Martínez Galdámez, Mario Holtmannspötter, Markus Spelle, Laurent Lagios, Konstantinos Ruggiero, Maria Vega, Pedro Sonwalkar, Hemant Chapot, René Lamin, Saleh Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title | Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title_full | Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title_fullStr | Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title_full_unstemmed | Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title_short | Periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
title_sort | periprocedural to 1-year safety and efficacy outcomes with the pipeline embolization device with shield technology for intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, post-market, multi-center study |
topic | Hemorrhagic Stroke |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7569365/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32482834 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015943 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ricehal periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT martinezgaldamezmario periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT holtmannspottermarkus periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT spellelaurent periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT lagioskonstantinos periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT ruggieromaria periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT vegapedro periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT sonwalkarhemant periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT chapotrene periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy AT laminsaleh periproceduralto1yearsafetyandefficacyoutcomeswiththepipelineembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnologyforintracranialaneurysmsaprospectivepostmarketmulticenterstudy |