target360纳米和Microplex Hypersoft 3D用作整饰线圈的临床和放射效果比较。

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sang Uk Kim, Joon Huh, Dal Soo Kim, Choon Woong Huh, Han Zo Choi, Dong Hoon Lee
{"title":"target360纳米和Microplex Hypersoft 3D用作整饰线圈的临床和放射效果比较。","authors":"Sang Uk Kim,&nbsp;Joon Huh,&nbsp;Dal Soo Kim,&nbsp;Choon Woong Huh,&nbsp;Han Zo Choi,&nbsp;Dong Hoon Lee","doi":"10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.37336-22.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the clinical outcomes of Target 360 nano (TG) and Microplex hypersoft 3D (MH) used as a finishing coil (FC).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>From January 2018 to December 2020, we retrospectively reviewed 243 coil embolization procedures performed using TG (n=152) and MH (n=91) coils of 1mm x 2 cm the same size as FC. Further, the clinical and radiographic results were compared by matching the propensity score between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical and angiographic results of the two coils after the propensity score matching. Successful occlusion was 89% and 86.8% and FC insertion failure was 20.9% and 28.6%. There were no differences in procedure-related complications and recurrence between the groups during the eight months follow-up period (3.3% versus 4.4% and 4.4% versus 3.3%, respectively). We also compared two subgroups of failed FC insertion (19 of TG and 26 of MH). The number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the failed TG group than in the failed MH group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no statistically significant difference between the clinical and radiological outcomes of TG and MH used as FC. However, in the FC insertion failure subgroups, the number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the TG failed group than in the MH failed. It was experimentally confirmed that the angle change of microcatheter tip with a large angle was large; however, further studies are required.</p>","PeriodicalId":23395,"journal":{"name":"Turkish neurosurgery","volume":"33 2","pages":"208-216"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Target 360 Nano and Microplex Hypersoft 3D Used as Finishing Coil.\",\"authors\":\"Sang Uk Kim,&nbsp;Joon Huh,&nbsp;Dal Soo Kim,&nbsp;Choon Woong Huh,&nbsp;Han Zo Choi,&nbsp;Dong Hoon Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.37336-22.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the clinical outcomes of Target 360 nano (TG) and Microplex hypersoft 3D (MH) used as a finishing coil (FC).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>From January 2018 to December 2020, we retrospectively reviewed 243 coil embolization procedures performed using TG (n=152) and MH (n=91) coils of 1mm x 2 cm the same size as FC. Further, the clinical and radiographic results were compared by matching the propensity score between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical and angiographic results of the two coils after the propensity score matching. Successful occlusion was 89% and 86.8% and FC insertion failure was 20.9% and 28.6%. There were no differences in procedure-related complications and recurrence between the groups during the eight months follow-up period (3.3% versus 4.4% and 4.4% versus 3.3%, respectively). We also compared two subgroups of failed FC insertion (19 of TG and 26 of MH). The number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the failed TG group than in the failed MH group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There was no statistically significant difference between the clinical and radiological outcomes of TG and MH used as FC. However, in the FC insertion failure subgroups, the number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the TG failed group than in the MH failed. It was experimentally confirmed that the angle change of microcatheter tip with a large angle was large; however, further studies are required.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Turkish neurosurgery\",\"volume\":\"33 2\",\"pages\":\"208-216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Turkish neurosurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.37336-22.1\",\"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":"Turkish neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.37336-22.1","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

目的:比较Target 360 nano (TG)与Microplex hypersoft 3D (MH)作为整饰线圈(FC)的临床效果。材料和方法:从2018年1月到2020年12月,我们回顾性回顾了243例使用TG (n=152)和MH (n=91)线圈栓塞的手术,这些线圈的大小与FC相同,为1mm x 2cm。进一步,通过匹配两组之间的倾向评分来比较临床和影像学结果。结果:经倾向评分匹配后,两种线圈的临床和血管造影结果无统计学差异。牙合成功率分别为89%和86.8%,FC插入失败率分别为20.9%和28.6%。在8个月的随访期间,两组手术相关并发症和复发率无差异(分别为3.3%对4.4%和4.4%对3.3%)。我们还比较了两个失败的FC插入亚组(TG 19例,MH 26例)。TG失败组有角度的导管数量明显高于MH失败组。结论:甘油三酯与MH用作FC的临床及影像学结果无统计学差异。然而,在FC插入失败亚组中,TG失败组的倾斜导管数量明显高于MH失败组。实验证实,微导管尖端角大时角度变化大;然而,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Target 360 Nano and Microplex Hypersoft 3D Used as Finishing Coil.

Aim: To compare the clinical outcomes of Target 360 nano (TG) and Microplex hypersoft 3D (MH) used as a finishing coil (FC).

Material and methods: From January 2018 to December 2020, we retrospectively reviewed 243 coil embolization procedures performed using TG (n=152) and MH (n=91) coils of 1mm x 2 cm the same size as FC. Further, the clinical and radiographic results were compared by matching the propensity score between the two groups.

Results: There were no statistically significant differences in the clinical and angiographic results of the two coils after the propensity score matching. Successful occlusion was 89% and 86.8% and FC insertion failure was 20.9% and 28.6%. There were no differences in procedure-related complications and recurrence between the groups during the eight months follow-up period (3.3% versus 4.4% and 4.4% versus 3.3%, respectively). We also compared two subgroups of failed FC insertion (19 of TG and 26 of MH). The number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the failed TG group than in the failed MH group.

Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference between the clinical and radiological outcomes of TG and MH used as FC. However, in the FC insertion failure subgroups, the number of angled catheters was significantly higher in the TG failed group than in the MH failed. It was experimentally confirmed that the angle change of microcatheter tip with a large angle was large; however, further studies are required.

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
Turkish neurosurgery
Turkish neurosurgery 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
126
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Turkish Neurosurgery is a peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary, open access and totally free journal directed at an audience of neurosurgery physicians and scientists. The official language of the journal is English. The journal publishes original articles in the form of clinical and basic research. Turkish Neurosurgery will only publish studies that have institutional review board (IRB) approval and have strictly observed an acceptable follow-up period. With the exception of reference presentation, Turkish Neurosurgery requires that all manuscripts be prepared in accordance with the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals.
×
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