Comparison of Neuroform Atlas Stent-Assisted Coiling and Coiling Alone in Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Safety and efficacy of stent-assisted coil embolization with periprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of acutely ruptured intracranial aneurysms

PURPOSE

Despite growing evidence for the effectiveness of stent-assisted coil embolization (SAC) in treating acutely ruptured aneurysms, the safety of stent placement in acute phase remains controversial because of concerns for stent-induced thromboembolism and hemorrhagic events attributable to the necessity of antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, we investigated the safety and efficacy of SAC with periprocedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compared with the coiling-only technique to determine whether it is a promising treatment strategy for ruptured aneurysms.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 203 enrolled patients with acutely ruptured aneurysms, categorizing them into two groups: SAC and coiling-only groups. Comparative analyses between the two groups regarding angiographic results, clinical outcomes, and procedure-related complications were performed. A subgroup analysis of procedural complications was conducted on patients who did not receive chronic antithrombotic medications to alleviate their influence before hospitalization.

RESULTS

130 (64.0%) patients were treated using the coiling-only technique, whereas 73 (36.0%) underwent SAC. There was a trend to a higher complete obliteration rate (p = 0.061) and significantly lower recanalization rate (p = 0.030) at angiographic follow-up in the SAC group compared to the coiling-only group. Postprocedural cerebral infarction occurred less frequently in the SAC group (8.2%) than in the coiling-only group (17.7%), showing a significant difference (p = 0.044). Although the ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage rate was significantly higher in the SAC group than in the coiling-only group (26.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.031), the incidence of symptomatic ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage was comparable. Subgroup analysis excluding patients receiving chronic antithrombotic medications showed similar results.

CONCLUSION

SAC with periprocedural DAPT could be a safe and effective treatment strategy for acutely ruptured aneurysms. Moreover, it might have a protective effect on postprocedural cerebral infarction without increasing the risk of symptomatic hemorrhagic complications.

Comparison of a covered stent and pipeline embolization device in intracranial aneurysm: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

The Willis covered stent (WCS) and pipeline embolization device (PED) have partly overlapping therapeutic indications. However, the differences of effect between these two treatments remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To compare clinical outcome, angiographic outcome, and complications following treatment with a WCS versus PED.

METHODS

Patients with intracranial aneurysms treated by a WCS or PED between January 2015 and December 2020 were included. The primary outcomes were complications, clinical outcome (modified Rankin Scale score >2), and angiographic outcome (incomplete aneurysm occlusion). Propensity score matching was conducted to adjust for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 94 aneurysms treated by WCS and 698 aneurysms by PED were included. Compared with the PED group, patients in the WCS group are younger, a greater number have a poor condition at admission, a larger proportion of ruptured, non-saccular, and anterior circulation aneurysms, a smaller aneurysm neck width, and less coiling assistance is required. A total of 42 (44.7%) branches were covered by WCS. After adjustment for age, sex, aneurysm type, rupture status, neck size, aneurysm location, and coiling, 50 WCS and PED pairs were examined for internal carotid artery aneurysms. No significant differences were observed in clinical (10.4% vs 2.1%, P=0.206) and angiographic outcomes (12.8% vs 18.2%, P=0.713). However, 27 branches covered by WCS, including 22 ophthalmic arteries and five posterior communicating arteries. Patients in the WCS group had a higher intraoperative complication rate than those in the PED group (28% vs 6%, P=0.008), especially in the occlusion rate of covered branches (51.9% vs 11.1%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The comparable clinical and angiographic outcomes of WCS or PED demonstrate the therapeutic potential of WCS as a viable alternative for aneurysms. However, the complication of occlusion of covered branches might not be negligible.

Endovascular Treatment of Wide-Neck Bifurcation Aneurysm: Recent Trends in Coil Embolization with Adjunctive Technique

Wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms (WNBAs) are sometimes challenging to treat. During endovascular treatment, it is important to prevent coil deviation and preserve normal vessels. Adjunctive balloon- and stent-assisted techniques have been developed. A meta-analysis of endovascular treatments of WNBAs revealed that only 40% of patients had complete occlusion. Recently, novel devices have been developed to expand the range of treatment options. Flow-diverter stents and intra-aneurysmal flow disruption devices do not require coils; however, coil embolization remains the standard procedure used by many neurointerventionists. This review describes the recent trends in adjunctive techniques for supporting coil embolization for WNBAs. We referred to literature on balloon-assisted techniques, stent-assisted techniques, Y-stenting, PulseRider, Barrel stents, Comaneci temporary stents, pCONUS, and eCLIPs. These reports showed that adequate embolization rates were generally greater than 80%, and the complete occlusion rate was as high as 94.6%. All devices had a relatively high occlusion rate; however, it may be inaccurate to simply compare each device because of the heterogeneity of the studies. It is important to select the best treatment for each individual case by considering not only literature-based efficacy and safety but also patient background, aneurysm characteristics, and operator experience.

A predictive model for the recurrence of intracranial aneurysms following coil embolization

Objective

This study aimed to identify risk factors for intracranial aneurysms (IAs) recurrence and establish a predictive model to aid evaluation.

Methods

A total of 302 patients with 312 IAs undergoing coil embolization between September 2017 and October 2022 were divided into two groups based on digital subtraction angiography follow-up. Clinical characteristics, operation-related factors, and morphologies were measured. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to identify the risk factors. Hazard ratios (HRs) were used to score points, and a predictive model was established. The test cohorts consisted of 51 IAs. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to determine the cutoff values and area under the curves (AUCs). A Delong test was performed to compare the AUCs.

Results

Diameter maximum (D max) (p < 0.001, HR = 1.221), Raymond-Roy occlusion classification (RROC) II or III (p = 0.004, HR = 2.852), and ruptured status (p < 0.001, HR = 7.782) were independent risk factors for the recurrence of IAs. A predictive model was established: D max + 2 * RROC (II or III; yes = 1, no = 0) + 6 * ruptured status (yes = 1; no = 0). The AUC of the predictive model (0.818) was significantly higher than those of D max (0.704), RROC (II or III) (0.645), and rupture status (0.683), respectively (Delong test, p < 0.05). The cutoff values of the predictive model and D max were 9.75 points and 6.65 mm, respectively.

Conclusion

The D max, RROC (II or III), and ruptured status could independently predict the recurrence of IAs after coil embolization. Our model could aid in practical evaluations.

Antiplatelets and antithrombotics in neurointerventional procedures: Guideline update

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet and antithrombotic medication management before, during, and after neurointerventional procedures has significant practice variation. This document updates and builds upon the 2014 Society of NeuroInterventional Surgery (SNIS) Guideline 'Platelet function inhibitor and platelet function testing in neurointerventional procedures', providing updates based on the treatment of specific pathologies and for patients with specific comorbidities.

METHODS

We performed a structured literature review of studies that have become available since the 2014 SNIS Guideline. We graded the quality of the evidence. Recommendations were arrived at through a consensus conference of the authors, then with additional input from the full SNIS Standards and Guidelines Committee and the SNIS Board of Directors.

RESULTS

The management of antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents before, during, and after endovascular neurointerventional procedures continues to evolve. The following recommendations were agreed on. (1) It is reasonable to resume anticoagulation after a neurointerventional procedure or major bleeding episode as soon as the thrombotic risk exceeds the bleeding risk in an individual patient (Class I, Level C-EO). (2) Platelet testing can be useful to guide local practice, and specific approaches to using the numbers demonstrate marked local variability (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (3) For patients without comorbidities undergoing brain aneurysm treatment, there are no additional considerations for medication choice beyond the thrombotic risks of the catheterization procedure and aneurysm treatment devices (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (4) For patients undergoing neurointerventional brain aneurysm treatment who have had cardiac stents placed within the last 6-12 months, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended (Class I, Level B-NR). (5) For patients being evaluated for neurointeventional brain aneurysm treatment who had venous thrombosis more than 3 months prior, discontinuation of oral anticoagulation (OAC) or vitamin K antagonists should be considered as weighed against the risk of delaying aneurysm treatment. For venous thrombosis less than 3 months in the past, delay of the neurointerventional procedure should be considered. If this is not possible, see atrial fibrillation recommendations (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (6) For patients with atrial fibrillation receiving OAC and in need of a neurointerventional procedure, the duration of TAT (triple antiplatelet/anticoagulation therapy=OAC plus DAPT) should be kept as short as possible or avoided in favor of OAC plus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) based on the individual's ischemic and bleeding risk profile (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (7) For patients with unruptured brain arteriovenous malformations there is no indication to change antiplatelet or anticoagulant management instituted for management of another disease (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (8) Patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) should continue DAPT following neurointerventional treatment for secondary stroke prevention (Class IIa, Level B-NR). (9) Following neurointerventional treatment for ICAD, DAPT should be continued for at least 3 months. In the absence of new stroke or transient ischemic attack symptoms, reversion to SAPT can be considered based on an individual patient's risk of hemorrhage versus ischemia (Class IIb, Level C-LD). (10) Patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS) should receive DAPT before and for at least 3 months following their procedure (Class IIa, Level B-R). (11) In patients undergoing CAS during emergent large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke treatment, it may be reasonable to administer a loading dose of intravenous or oral glycoprotein IIb/IIIa or P2Y12 inhibitor followed by maintenance intravenous infusion or oral dosing to prevent stent thrombosis whether or not the patient has received thrombolytic therapy (Class IIb, C-LD). (12) For patients with cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, anticoagulation with heparin is front-line therapy; endovascular therapy may be considered particularly in cases of clinical deterioration despite medical therapy (Class IIa, Level B-R).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the quality of evidence is lower than for coronary interventions due to a lower number of patients and procedures, neurointerventional antiplatelet and antithrombotic management shares several themes. Prospective and randomized studies are needed to strengthen the data supporting these recommendations.

Artificial Intelligence and Neurosurgery: Tracking Antiplatelet Response Patterns for Endovascular Intervention

Platelets play a critical role in blood clotting and the development of arterial blockages. Antiplatelet therapy is vital for preventing recurring events in conditions like coronary artery disease and strokes. However, there is a lack of comprehensive guidelines for using antiplatelet agents in elective neurosurgery. Continuing therapy during surgery poses a bleeding risk, while discontinuing it before surgery increases the risk of thrombosis. Discontinuation is recommended in neurosurgical settings but carries an elevated risk of ischemic events. Conversely, maintaining antithrombotic therapy may increase bleeding and the need for transfusions, leading to a poor prognosis. Artificial intelligence (AI) holds promise in making difficult decisions regarding antiplatelet therapy. This paper discusses current clinical guidelines and supported regimens for antiplatelet therapy in neurosurgery. It also explores methodologies like P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) monitoring and thromboelastography (TEG) mapping for monitoring the use of antiplatelet regimens as well as their limitations. The paper explores the potential of AI to overcome such limitations associated with PRU monitoring and TEG mapping. It highlights various studies in the field of cardiovascular and neuroendovascular surgery which use AI prediction models to forecast adverse outcomes such as ischemia and bleeding, offering assistance in decision-making for antiplatelet therapy. In addition, the use of AI to improve patient adherence to antiplatelet regimens is also considered. Overall, this research aims to provide insights into the use of antiplatelet therapy and the role of AI in optimizing treatment plans in neurosurgical settings.