• Geng Zhou, Yue-Qi Zhu, Ming Su, Kai-Di Gao, and Ming-Hua Li.
• Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University Affiliated Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai, China.
• World Neurosurg. 2016 Apr 1; 88: 640-645.

ObjectiveTo review the literature on flow-diverting device (FDD) treatments for intracranial aneurysms (IAs) and to compare the safety and efficacy of FDDs with coil embolization treatment (CET) for IAs using a meta-analysis of published studies.MethodsA systematic electronic search was conducted of PubMed, Springer Link, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Database on all accessible published articles through September 2015. Abstracts, full-text manuscripts, and the reference lists of retrieved articles were analyzed. Studies that explicitly compared FDD and CET approaches to the treatment of IAs were included. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated for the complete occlusion rate and the morbidity rate using a random-effects model.ResultsNine studies were included in the analysis, containing retrospectively collected data for 863 patients. FDD treatment showed a significantly higher complete occlusion rate than CET (OR = 3.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.11-4.65) and the subgroup of stent-assisted coiling did (OR = 2.08; 95% CI, 1.34-3.24). FDDs did not achieve a significantly lower overall morbidity rate compared with CET (OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.45-1.69) or the SAC (stent-assisted coiling) subgroup (OR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.33-2.26), and our results did not show a significant difference in mortality between the two techniques.ConclusionsFDD treatment of IAs yielded satisfactory results in complete occlusion rate compared with CET. The FDD procedure is feasible and has no significant difference in morbidity risk. Despite the findings reported herein, further validation with well-designed, multicenter randomized controlled trials is needed.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

22 keywords...

hide…