Safety and Efficacy of Low-Profile, Self-Expandable Stents for Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: Initial and Midterm Results - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Q1 Medicine Interventional Neurology Pub Date : 2017-10-01 Epub Date: 2017-04-26 DOI:10.1159/000471890
Su-Yeon Park, Jae-Sang Oh, Hyuk-Jin Oh, Seok-Mann Yoon, Hack-Gun Bae
{"title":"Safety and Efficacy of Low-Profile, Self-Expandable Stents for Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: Initial and Midterm Results - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Su-Yeon Park,&nbsp;Jae-Sang Oh,&nbsp;Hyuk-Jin Oh,&nbsp;Seok-Mann Yoon,&nbsp;Hack-Gun Bae","doi":"10.1159/000471890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Low-profile stents seem to be associated with a higher incidence of thromboembolic events compared with preexisting stents. We conducted a systematic review of 11 eligible reports and a meta-analysis of 7 reports with respect to the clinical efficacy and safety of low-profile stents. There were 217 intracranial aneurysms reported; 22% were ruptured aneurysms. In all, 72% were treated using single stenting, 19% were treated using overlapping stenting, and 6% were treated using balloon angioplasty followed by stenting; 3% were used to assess the flow diverter effect in a dissecting aneurysm or were treated using unexpected subtotal coil packing. On immediate postprocedural angiographic results, Raymond class I and II obliteration was obtained in 87% of the aneurysms. On angiographic results at 3-6 months, Raymond class I and II obliteration or stability was obtained in 79% of the aneurysms, and Raymond class III obliteration was obtained in 3% of the aneurysms. The recurrence rate on follow-up of intracranial aneurysms was 6.5% (5.7% with LEO Baby and 1.3% with LVIS Jr). The periprocedural complication rate was 12.4%. Periprocedural thromboembolism occurred in 6.5% of the cases. The rate of in-stent stenosis on follow-up of intracranial aneurysms was 10%. In the midterm result, the recurrence rate with use of low-profile, self-expandable stents was relatively low compared to that with use of other self-expandable stents. In the meta-analysis comparing LEO Baby with LVIS Jr, the obliteration rate at 6 months was not significantly different, but the periprocedural complication rate was relatively low with LVIS Jr.</p>","PeriodicalId":46280,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000471890","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000471890","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/4/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Low-profile stents seem to be associated with a higher incidence of thromboembolic events compared with preexisting stents. We conducted a systematic review of 11 eligible reports and a meta-analysis of 7 reports with respect to the clinical efficacy and safety of low-profile stents. There were 217 intracranial aneurysms reported; 22% were ruptured aneurysms. In all, 72% were treated using single stenting, 19% were treated using overlapping stenting, and 6% were treated using balloon angioplasty followed by stenting; 3% were used to assess the flow diverter effect in a dissecting aneurysm or were treated using unexpected subtotal coil packing. On immediate postprocedural angiographic results, Raymond class I and II obliteration was obtained in 87% of the aneurysms. On angiographic results at 3-6 months, Raymond class I and II obliteration or stability was obtained in 79% of the aneurysms, and Raymond class III obliteration was obtained in 3% of the aneurysms. The recurrence rate on follow-up of intracranial aneurysms was 6.5% (5.7% with LEO Baby and 1.3% with LVIS Jr). The periprocedural complication rate was 12.4%. Periprocedural thromboembolism occurred in 6.5% of the cases. The rate of in-stent stenosis on follow-up of intracranial aneurysms was 10%. In the midterm result, the recurrence rate with use of low-profile, self-expandable stents was relatively low compared to that with use of other self-expandable stents. In the meta-analysis comparing LEO Baby with LVIS Jr, the obliteration rate at 6 months was not significantly different, but the periprocedural complication rate was relatively low with LVIS Jr.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
低轮廓、自膨胀支架治疗颅内动脉瘤的安全性和有效性:初步和中期结果-系统回顾和荟萃分析
与现有支架相比,低轮廓支架似乎与更高的血栓栓塞事件发生率相关。我们对11份符合条件的报告进行了系统回顾,并对7份关于低轮廓支架临床疗效和安全性的报告进行了荟萃分析。报告颅内动脉瘤217例;22%为动脉瘤破裂。总的来说,72%的患者使用单一支架,19%的患者使用重叠支架,6%的患者使用球囊血管成形术后再使用支架;3%用于评估夹层动脉瘤的分流效果,或采用意外的次全线圈填充治疗。术后立即血管造影结果显示,87%的动脉瘤获得了雷蒙德I级和II级闭塞。在3-6个月的血管造影结果中,79%的动脉瘤获得了Raymond I级和II级闭塞或稳定,3%的动脉瘤获得了Raymond III级闭塞。颅内动脉瘤随访复发率为6.5% (LEO Baby为5.7%,LVIS Jr为1.3%)。围手术期并发症发生率为12.4%。6.5%的病例发生围手术期血栓栓塞。颅内动脉瘤随访时支架内狭窄发生率为10%。在中期结果中,与使用其他自扩展支架相比,使用低轮廓自扩展支架的复发率相对较低。在meta分析中,LEO Baby与LVIS Jr比较,6个月时的闭塞率无显著差异,但LVIS Jr的围手术期并发症发生率相对较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Interventional Neurology
Interventional Neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Recanalization of Tandem Vertebrobasilar Occlusions with Contralateral Vertebral Occlusion or Hypoplasia via either Direct Passage or the SHERPA Technique. Does the Addition of Non-Approved Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for rtPA Impact Treatment Rates? Findings in Australia, the UK, and the USA. In vitro Remote Aspiration Embolectomy for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke. Endovascular Reperfusion for Acute Isolated Cervical Carotid Occlusions: The Concept of "Hemodynamic Thrombectomy". An Appraisal of the 2018 Guidelines for the Early Management of Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1