第四代管道™优势导流:首次报道了美国安全性和可行性的经验。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ahmad Sweid, Ahmad Chahine, Stephanie Hage, Rami Z Morsi, Sonam Thind, Lina Karar, Archit Baskaran, Julián Carrión-Penagos, Harsh Desai, Sachin A Kothari, Rohini Rana, Okker Verhagen Metman, Jehad Zakaria, James E Siegler, Issam Awad, Michael C Hurley, Shyam Prabhakaran, Sean Polster, Tareq Kass-Hout
{"title":"第四代管道™优势导流:首次报道了美国安全性和可行性的经验。","authors":"Ahmad Sweid, Ahmad Chahine, Stephanie Hage, Rami Z Morsi, Sonam Thind, Lina Karar, Archit Baskaran, Julián Carrión-Penagos, Harsh Desai, Sachin A Kothari, Rohini Rana, Okker Verhagen Metman, Jehad Zakaria, James E Siegler, Issam Awad, Michael C Hurley, Shyam Prabhakaran, Sean Polster, Tareq Kass-Hout","doi":"10.1177/15910199241301119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA) is the fourth generation of Pipeline flow diverter devices, offering numerous technical improvements. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-center retrospective study describing the use of The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Technical feasibility and safety were assessed in terms of intra and postprocedural complications, as well as neurological morbidity upon follow-up. Both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 12 patients in our study (mean age 62; females: <i>n</i> = 9/12, 75%). Aneurysm morphology varied between saccular (41.6%), fusiform (41.6%), blister (8.3%), and pseudoaneurysm (8.3%). Three cases (25%) involved ruptured aneurysms treated in the acute setting. A transradial access was used in 10 cases (83.3%). There was a 100% success in deployment. Seven cases (58.3%) were treated with adjunct embolization device other than a flow diversion. Eight cases (66.6%) were treated with a single flow diversion, three cases (25%) were treated with two flow diversion, and one case (8.3%) was treated with three flow diversion stents. There were no intraoperative complications. There was one postprocedural complication in a dissecting ruptured PICA aneurysm that was ultimately treated with two flow diversion stents and an intrasaccular device.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>To our knowledge, this is the first US series assessing the periprocedural safety and feasibility of consecutive patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).</p>","PeriodicalId":49174,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"15910199241301119"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11618843/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fourth-generation Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage flow diversion: First reported US experience of safety and feasibility.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmad Sweid, Ahmad Chahine, Stephanie Hage, Rami Z Morsi, Sonam Thind, Lina Karar, Archit Baskaran, Julián Carrión-Penagos, Harsh Desai, Sachin A Kothari, Rohini Rana, Okker Verhagen Metman, Jehad Zakaria, James E Siegler, Issam Awad, Michael C Hurley, Shyam Prabhakaran, Sean Polster, Tareq Kass-Hout\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15910199241301119\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA) is the fourth generation of Pipeline flow diverter devices, offering numerous technical improvements. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a single-center retrospective study describing the use of The Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage embolization device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Technical feasibility and safety were assessed in terms of intra and postprocedural complications, as well as neurological morbidity upon follow-up. Both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 12 patients in our study (mean age 62; females: <i>n</i> = 9/12, 75%). Aneurysm morphology varied between saccular (41.6%), fusiform (41.6%), blister (8.3%), and pseudoaneurysm (8.3%). Three cases (25%) involved ruptured aneurysms treated in the acute setting. A transradial access was used in 10 cases (83.3%). There was a 100% success in deployment. Seven cases (58.3%) were treated with adjunct embolization device other than a flow diversion. Eight cases (66.6%) were treated with a single flow diversion, three cases (25%) were treated with two flow diversion, and one case (8.3%) was treated with three flow diversion stents. There were no intraoperative complications. There was one postprocedural complication in a dissecting ruptured PICA aneurysm that was ultimately treated with two flow diversion stents and an intrasaccular device.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>To our knowledge, this is the first US series assessing the periprocedural safety and feasibility of consecutive patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the Pipeline<sup>™</sup> Vantage device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49174,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15910199241301119\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11618843/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interventional Neuroradiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199241301119\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199241301119","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:Pipeline™Vantage栓塞装置(Medtronic, Irvine, CA)是第四代Pipeline分流装置,提供了许多技术改进。本研究旨在评估the Pipeline™Vantage栓塞装置(Medtronic, Irvine, CA)的可行性和安全性。方法:这是一项单中心回顾性研究,描述了使用the Pipeline™Vantage栓塞装置治疗颅内动脉瘤。根据术中、术后并发症以及随访时的神经系统并发症评估技术可行性和安全性。包括破裂和未破裂的动脉瘤。结果:我们纳入了12例患者(平均年龄62岁;女性:n = 9/12, 75%)。动脉瘤形态有球囊状(41.6%)、梭状(41.6%)、水疱状(8.3%)和假性动脉瘤(8.3%)。3例(25%)涉及动脉瘤破裂的急性治疗。经桡动脉入路10例(83.3%)。在部署中取得了100%的成功。7例(58.3%)采用非分流辅助栓塞装置治疗。单次分流治疗8例(66.6%),两次分流治疗3例(25%),三次分流治疗1例(8.3%)。无术中并发症。有一个手术后并发症在剥离破裂的异食癖动脉瘤,最终治疗两个血流转移支架和囊内装置。讨论:据我们所知,这是美国第一个评估连续使用Pipeline™Vantage设备治疗颅内动脉瘤患者围手术期安全性和可行性的系列研究(美敦力,欧文,CA)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Fourth-generation Pipeline Vantage flow diversion: First reported US experience of safety and feasibility.

Background: The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA) is the fourth generation of Pipeline flow diverter devices, offering numerous technical improvements. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).

Methods: This was a single-center retrospective study describing the use of The Pipeline Vantage embolization device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Technical feasibility and safety were assessed in terms of intra and postprocedural complications, as well as neurological morbidity upon follow-up. Both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms were included.

Results: We included 12 patients in our study (mean age 62; females: n = 9/12, 75%). Aneurysm morphology varied between saccular (41.6%), fusiform (41.6%), blister (8.3%), and pseudoaneurysm (8.3%). Three cases (25%) involved ruptured aneurysms treated in the acute setting. A transradial access was used in 10 cases (83.3%). There was a 100% success in deployment. Seven cases (58.3%) were treated with adjunct embolization device other than a flow diversion. Eight cases (66.6%) were treated with a single flow diversion, three cases (25%) were treated with two flow diversion, and one case (8.3%) was treated with three flow diversion stents. There were no intraoperative complications. There was one postprocedural complication in a dissecting ruptured PICA aneurysm that was ultimately treated with two flow diversion stents and an intrasaccular device.

Discussion: To our knowledge, this is the first US series assessing the periprocedural safety and feasibility of consecutive patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Vantage device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Interventional Neuroradiology
Interventional Neuroradiology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信