分流处理中的辅助卷绕不能防止延迟破裂:一项全国性调查。

IF 1.2 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Shigeru Miyachi, Reo Kawaguchi
{"title":"分流处理中的辅助卷绕不能防止延迟破裂:一项全国性调查。","authors":"Shigeru Miyachi, Reo Kawaguchi","doi":"10.5469/neuroint.2025.00129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Delayed rupture (DR) can occur even after successful deployment of flow diverters (FDs). Although coiling is often added to reduce the risk of rupture in high-risk intracranial aneurysms, its effectiveness remains unproven. To assess current practice in Japan, a questionnaire was distributed to evaluate the effect of coiling on rupture prevention.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective survey was sent to 124 institutions with qualified FD practitioners, receiving 76 responses (61%). A total of 5,527 patients treated with FDs were included in the study, and clinical records of 5,211 aneurysms were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DRs (excluding intraprocedural accidents) occurred in 36 cases (0.7%). Of 1,286 aneurysms treated with FD and coiling, 9 (0.7%) ruptured. Ruptured aneurysms in the FD with coiling group were located in the supraclinoid segment (4 cases), paraclinoid internal carotid artery (ICA) (3 cases), and basilar artery (2 cases), of which 7 were classified as giant (diameter >20 mm). In the FD-alone group, 55% (15/27) of ruptured aneurysms were located in the cavernous ICA. Time to rupture ranged from 1 to 2,220 days with no significant difference between groups, except for 1 exceptionally delayed case. Outcomes were worse in the FD with coiling group, where 67% (6/9) had a modified Rankin Scale score of 6. The DR rate was identical between the FD-alone and FD with coiling groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Coiling does not appear to prevent rupture after FD treatment. Aneurysms treated with coiling tended to be larger, to rupture earlier, and to have worse outcomes, probably due to selection bias. Routine loose coiling may provide psychological reassurance but lacks proven efficacy as a preventive measure.</p>","PeriodicalId":19140,"journal":{"name":"Neurointervention","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Adjunctive Coiling in Flow Diverter Treatment Does Not Prevent Delayed Rupture: A Nationwide Survey.\",\"authors\":\"Shigeru Miyachi, Reo Kawaguchi\",\"doi\":\"10.5469/neuroint.2025.00129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Delayed rupture (DR) can occur even after successful deployment of flow diverters (FDs). Although coiling is often added to reduce the risk of rupture in high-risk intracranial aneurysms, its effectiveness remains unproven. To assess current practice in Japan, a questionnaire was distributed to evaluate the effect of coiling on rupture prevention.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A retrospective survey was sent to 124 institutions with qualified FD practitioners, receiving 76 responses (61%). A total of 5,527 patients treated with FDs were included in the study, and clinical records of 5,211 aneurysms were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DRs (excluding intraprocedural accidents) occurred in 36 cases (0.7%). Of 1,286 aneurysms treated with FD and coiling, 9 (0.7%) ruptured. Ruptured aneurysms in the FD with coiling group were located in the supraclinoid segment (4 cases), paraclinoid internal carotid artery (ICA) (3 cases), and basilar artery (2 cases), of which 7 were classified as giant (diameter >20 mm). In the FD-alone group, 55% (15/27) of ruptured aneurysms were located in the cavernous ICA. Time to rupture ranged from 1 to 2,220 days with no significant difference between groups, except for 1 exceptionally delayed case. Outcomes were worse in the FD with coiling group, where 67% (6/9) had a modified Rankin Scale score of 6. The DR rate was identical between the FD-alone and FD with coiling groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Coiling does not appear to prevent rupture after FD treatment. Aneurysms treated with coiling tended to be larger, to rupture earlier, and to have worse outcomes, probably due to selection bias. Routine loose coiling may provide psychological reassurance but lacks proven efficacy as a preventive measure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19140,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurointervention\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurointervention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5469/neuroint.2025.00129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurointervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5469/neuroint.2025.00129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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

目的:延迟破裂(DR)即使在成功部署分流器(fd)后也可能发生。虽然在高危颅内动脉瘤中经常加入卷取术以降低破裂的风险,但其有效性尚未得到证实。为了评估日本目前的做法,我们分发了一份问卷来评估卷绕在防止破裂方面的效果。材料和方法:对124家具有FD从业资格的机构进行回顾性调查,收到76份回复(61%)。研究共纳入5527例接受fd治疗的患者,并分析了5211例动脉瘤的临床记录。结果:dr(不包括术中意外)36例(0.7%)。在使用FD和卷绕术治疗的1286个动脉瘤中,9个(0.7%)破裂。FD伴卷绕组破裂动脉瘤位于颈线上段(4例)、颈线旁颈内动脉(ICA)(3例)和基底动脉(2例),其中巨动脉瘤7例(直径> ~ 20mm)。在单独使用fd组中,55%(15/27)的破裂动脉瘤位于海绵状ICA。破裂时间为1 ~ 2220天,除1例异常延迟外,各组间无显著差异。FD合并盘绕组的结果更差,其中67%(6/9)的改良Rankin量表得分为6分。单独FD组和FD组的DR率相同。结论:盘绕并不能预防FD治疗后的破裂。可能是由于选择偏倚,用卷取术治疗的动脉瘤更大,破裂更早,结果更差。常规松卷可能提供心理安慰,但缺乏作为预防措施的有效证明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Adjunctive Coiling in Flow Diverter Treatment Does Not Prevent Delayed Rupture: A Nationwide Survey.

Purpose: Delayed rupture (DR) can occur even after successful deployment of flow diverters (FDs). Although coiling is often added to reduce the risk of rupture in high-risk intracranial aneurysms, its effectiveness remains unproven. To assess current practice in Japan, a questionnaire was distributed to evaluate the effect of coiling on rupture prevention.

Materials and methods: A retrospective survey was sent to 124 institutions with qualified FD practitioners, receiving 76 responses (61%). A total of 5,527 patients treated with FDs were included in the study, and clinical records of 5,211 aneurysms were analyzed.

Results: DRs (excluding intraprocedural accidents) occurred in 36 cases (0.7%). Of 1,286 aneurysms treated with FD and coiling, 9 (0.7%) ruptured. Ruptured aneurysms in the FD with coiling group were located in the supraclinoid segment (4 cases), paraclinoid internal carotid artery (ICA) (3 cases), and basilar artery (2 cases), of which 7 were classified as giant (diameter >20 mm). In the FD-alone group, 55% (15/27) of ruptured aneurysms were located in the cavernous ICA. Time to rupture ranged from 1 to 2,220 days with no significant difference between groups, except for 1 exceptionally delayed case. Outcomes were worse in the FD with coiling group, where 67% (6/9) had a modified Rankin Scale score of 6. The DR rate was identical between the FD-alone and FD with coiling groups.

Conclusion: Coiling does not appear to prevent rupture after FD treatment. Aneurysms treated with coiling tended to be larger, to rupture earlier, and to have worse outcomes, probably due to selection bias. Routine loose coiling may provide psychological reassurance but lacks proven efficacy as a preventive measure.

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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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