Cargando…

Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of stent-assisted coiling (SAC) with those of coiling alone (CA) for the treatment of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: We enrolled 245 patients with ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms treated with coil embolization. Patien...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Guanghao, Wu, Yina, Wei, Yanpeng, Xue, Gaici, Chen, Rundong, Lv, Nan, Zhang, Xiaoxi, Duan, Guoli, Yu, Ying, Li, Qiang, Xu, Yi, Huang, Qinghai, Yang, Pengfei, Zuo, Qiao, Liu, Jianmin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9763558/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36561296
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1076026
_version_ 1784853085108043776
author Zhang, Guanghao
Wu, Yina
Wei, Yanpeng
Xue, Gaici
Chen, Rundong
Lv, Nan
Zhang, Xiaoxi
Duan, Guoli
Yu, Ying
Li, Qiang
Xu, Yi
Huang, Qinghai
Yang, Pengfei
Zuo, Qiao
Liu, Jianmin
author_facet Zhang, Guanghao
Wu, Yina
Wei, Yanpeng
Xue, Gaici
Chen, Rundong
Lv, Nan
Zhang, Xiaoxi
Duan, Guoli
Yu, Ying
Li, Qiang
Xu, Yi
Huang, Qinghai
Yang, Pengfei
Zuo, Qiao
Liu, Jianmin
author_sort Zhang, Guanghao
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of stent-assisted coiling (SAC) with those of coiling alone (CA) for the treatment of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: We enrolled 245 patients with ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms treated with coil embolization. Patients were grouped into SAC and CA groups. Baseline characteristics, periprocedural complications, clinical outcomes, and angiographic results were compared between the two groups. In addition, a subgroup analysis was conducted in the SAC group, and patients were regrouped into low-profile visualized intraluminal support (LVIS) and laser-cut groups to compare the perioperative procedure-related complications and clinical and angiographic follow-up outcomes. RESULTS: All baseline characteristics were equivalent between the two groups except for aneurysm size and dome-to-neck aspect ratio. The rates of overall procedure-related complications, intraprocedural rupture, postoperative early rebleeding, intraprocedural thrombosis, postprocedural thrombosis, and procedure-related mortality were comparable between the two groups (P = 0.105, 0.145, 0.308, 1.000, 1.000, 0.160, respectively). Nevertheless, the rate of hemorrhagic complication in the SAC group was significantly higher (P = 0.023). The angiographic follow-up outcomes showed that the SAC group had a higher complete occlusion rate and lower recurrence rate (88.2 vs. 67.1%, 5.4 vs. 15.2%, P = 0.001). The clinical outcomes at discharge and follow-up between the two groups demonstrated no significant differences (P = 0.192 and P = 0.085, respectively). For subgroup analysis, LVIS stents were associated with a significantly higher rate of complete occlusion (P = 0.014) and a lower rate of intraprocedural rupture (p = 0.021). Moreover, multivariate analysis showed that there were no predictors for the overall, hemorrhagic, and ischemic procedure-related complications, while Raymond class was an independent predictor of retreatment (OR = 3.508, 95% CI 1.168–11.603; P = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Stent-assisted coiling may increase the incidence of hemorrhagic events with favorable angiographic results and comparable clinical outcomes compared with stand-alone coiling. Nevertheless, LVIS stent could improve the safety compared with lazer-cut stent. Simultaneously, considering the better long-term effect, LVIS stent-assisted coiling may be a preferable choice for ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9763558
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97635582022-12-21 Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center Zhang, Guanghao Wu, Yina Wei, Yanpeng Xue, Gaici Chen, Rundong Lv, Nan Zhang, Xiaoxi Duan, Guoli Yu, Ying Li, Qiang Xu, Yi Huang, Qinghai Yang, Pengfei Zuo, Qiao Liu, Jianmin Front Neurol Neurology OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of stent-assisted coiling (SAC) with those of coiling alone (CA) for the treatment of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: We enrolled 245 patients with ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms treated with coil embolization. Patients were grouped into SAC and CA groups. Baseline characteristics, periprocedural complications, clinical outcomes, and angiographic results were compared between the two groups. In addition, a subgroup analysis was conducted in the SAC group, and patients were regrouped into low-profile visualized intraluminal support (LVIS) and laser-cut groups to compare the perioperative procedure-related complications and clinical and angiographic follow-up outcomes. RESULTS: All baseline characteristics were equivalent between the two groups except for aneurysm size and dome-to-neck aspect ratio. The rates of overall procedure-related complications, intraprocedural rupture, postoperative early rebleeding, intraprocedural thrombosis, postprocedural thrombosis, and procedure-related mortality were comparable between the two groups (P = 0.105, 0.145, 0.308, 1.000, 1.000, 0.160, respectively). Nevertheless, the rate of hemorrhagic complication in the SAC group was significantly higher (P = 0.023). The angiographic follow-up outcomes showed that the SAC group had a higher complete occlusion rate and lower recurrence rate (88.2 vs. 67.1%, 5.4 vs. 15.2%, P = 0.001). The clinical outcomes at discharge and follow-up between the two groups demonstrated no significant differences (P = 0.192 and P = 0.085, respectively). For subgroup analysis, LVIS stents were associated with a significantly higher rate of complete occlusion (P = 0.014) and a lower rate of intraprocedural rupture (p = 0.021). Moreover, multivariate analysis showed that there were no predictors for the overall, hemorrhagic, and ischemic procedure-related complications, while Raymond class was an independent predictor of retreatment (OR = 3.508, 95% CI 1.168–11.603; P = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Stent-assisted coiling may increase the incidence of hemorrhagic events with favorable angiographic results and comparable clinical outcomes compared with stand-alone coiling. Nevertheless, LVIS stent could improve the safety compared with lazer-cut stent. Simultaneously, considering the better long-term effect, LVIS stent-assisted coiling may be a preferable choice for ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-12-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9763558/ /pubmed/36561296 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1076026 Text en Copyright © 2022 Zhang, Wu, Wei, Xue, Chen, Lv, Zhang, Duan, Yu, Li, Xu, Huang, Yang, Zuo and Liu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neurology
Zhang, Guanghao
Wu, Yina
Wei, Yanpeng
Xue, Gaici
Chen, Rundong
Lv, Nan
Zhang, Xiaoxi
Duan, Guoli
Yu, Ying
Li, Qiang
Xu, Yi
Huang, Qinghai
Yang, Pengfei
Zuo, Qiao
Liu, Jianmin
Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title_full Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title_fullStr Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title_full_unstemmed Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title_short Stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: A contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
title_sort stent-assisted coiling vs. coiling alone of ruptured tiny intracranial aneurysms: a contemporary cohort study in a high-volume center
topic Neurology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9763558/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36561296
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.1076026
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangguanghao stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT wuyina stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT weiyanpeng stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT xuegaici stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT chenrundong stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT lvnan stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT zhangxiaoxi stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT duanguoli stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT yuying stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT liqiang stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT xuyi stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT huangqinghai stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT yangpengfei stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT zuoqiao stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter
AT liujianmin stentassistedcoilingvscoilingaloneofrupturedtinyintracranialaneurysmsacontemporarycohortstudyinahighvolumecenter