Neurosurg Focus
-
The Pipeline embolization device (PED) is the most widely used flow diverter in endovascular neurosurgery. In 2011, the device received FDA approval for the treatment of large and giant aneurysms in the internal carotid artery extending from the petrous to the superior hypophyseal segments. ⋯ Some of these off-label uses include previously treated aneurysms, acutely ruptured aneurysms, small aneurysms, distal circulation aneurysms, posterior circulation aneurysms, fusiform aneurysms, dissecting aneurysms, pseudoaneurysms, and even carotid-cavernous fistulas. The authors present a literature review of the safety and efficacy of the PED in these off-label uses.
-
OBJECTIVE Rupture of large or giant intracranial aneurysms leads to significant morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Both coiling and the Pipeline embolization device (PED) have been shown to be safe and clinically effective for the treatment of unruptured large and giant intracranial aneurysms; however, the relative cost-to-outcome ratio is unknown. The authors present the first cost-effectiveness analysis to compare the economic impact of the PED compared with coiling or no treatment for the endovascular management of large or giant intracranial aneurysms. ⋯ One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to assumptions about the costs and mortality risks for PED and coiling. Probabilistic sampling demonstrated that PED was the cost-effective strategy in 58.4% of iterations, coiling was the cost-effective strategy in 41.4% of iterations, and the no-treatment option was the cost-effective strategy in only 0.2% of iterations. CONCLUSIONS The authors' cost-effective model demonstrated that elective endovascular techniques such as PED and endovascular coiling are cost-effective strategies for improving health outcomes and lifetime quality of life measures in patients with large or giant unruptured intracranial aneurysm.
-
OBJECTIVE Ruptured blister aneurysms remain challenging lesions for treatment due to their broad, shallow anatomy and thin, fragile wall. Historical challenges with both open microsurgical approaches and intrasaccular endovascular approaches have led to increased use of flow diversion for management of these aneurysms. However, the optimum paradigm, including timing of treatment, use of dual antiplatelet therapy, and number of flow-diverter devices to use remains unknown. ⋯ CONCLUSIONS Pipeline flow diversion is a technically feasible and effective treatment for ruptured blister aneurysms, particularly in good-grade patients without hydrocephalus. Patients with a worse grade on presentation and requiring EVDs may have higher risk for bleeding complications and poor outcome. There was no rebleeding from the target lesion with use of a single device in this series.
-
OBJECTIVE Flow diversion has emerged as a viable treatment option for selected intracranial aneurysms and recently has been gaining traction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of flow-diverter devices (FDDs) over a long-term follow-up period. METHODS The authors retrospectively reviewed all cerebral aneurysm cases that had been admitted to the Division of Neurosurgery of the Università degli Studi di Napoli between November 2008 and November 2015 and treated with an FDD. ⋯ In the present study, the authors observed effective and stable aneurysm occlusion, even at the long-term follow-up. Data in this study also suggest that ischemic complications can occur at a later stage, particularly at 12-18 months. On the other hand, no other ischemic or hemorrhagic complications occurred beyond 24 months.
-
Case Reports
Novel use of flow diversion for the treatment of aneurysms associated with arteriovenous malformations.
The use of flow-diverting stents for intracranial aneurysms has become more prevalent, and flow diverters are now routinely used beyond their initial scope of approval at the proximal internal carotid artery. Although flow diversion for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms is becoming more commonplace, there have been no reports of its use to treat flow-related cerebral aneurysms associated with arteriovenous malformations (AVMs). The authors report the cases of 2 patients whose AVM-associated aneurysms were managed with flow diversion. ⋯ The patient underwent placement of a flow-diverting stent, and complete occlusion of the aneurysm was observed on a 7-month follow-up angiogram. These 2 cases illustrate the potential for use of flow diversion as a treatment strategy for feeding artery aneurysms associated with AVMs. Because of the need for dual antiplatelet medications after flow diversion in this patient population, however, this strategy should be used judiciously.