Pipeline Embolization Device for the Treatment of Intracranial Pseudoaneurysms

Stephanie H. Chen, David J. McCarthy, Dallas Sheinberg, Ricardo Hanel, Samir Sur, Pascal Jabbour, Elias Atallah, Nohra Chalouhi, Aaron Dumont, Peter Amenta, David Hasan, Daniel Raper, Kenneth Liu, John A. Jane, R. Webster Crowley, Pedro Aguilar-Salinas, Josh Bentley, Stephen Monteith, Bartley D. Mitchell, Dileep R. YavagalEric C. Peterson, Robert M. Starke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Intracranial pseudoaneurysms (PSAs) are associated with high rupture and mortality rates and have traditionally been treated by parent vessel sacrifice. There has been recent interest in using flow-diverting devices for treatment of these complex lesions while preserving flow through the parent artery. The objective of this study is to examine the safety and efficacy of these devices in the treatment of intracranial PSA. Methods: We performed a multi-institutional retrospective study of intracranial PSAs treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) between 2014 and 2017 at 7 institutions. Complications and clinical and radiographic outcomes were reviewed. Results: A total of 19 patients underwent PED placement for intracranial PSA. Iatrogenic injury and trauma comprised most etiologies in our series. The mean pseudoaneurysm diameter was 8.8 mm, and 18 of 19 PSAs (95%) involved the internal carotid artery (ICA). Multiple PEDs were deployed in a telescoping fashion in 7 patients (37%). Of the 18 patients with follow up imaging, 14 (78%) achieved complete pseudoaneurysm obliteration and 2 achieved near-complete obliteration (11%). Two patients (11%) were found to have significant pseudoaneurysm progression on short-term follow-up and required ICA sacrifice. No patients experienced new neurologic deficits or deterioration secondary to PED placement. No patients experienced bleeding or rebleeding from PSA. Conclusions: In well-selected patients, the use of flow-diverting stents may be a feasible alternative to parent vessel sacrifice. Given the high morbidity and mortality associated with PSA, we recommend short- and long-term radiographic follow-up for patients treated with flow-diverting stents.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e86-e93
JournalWorld neurosurgery
Volume127
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2019

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Aneurysm
  • Bypass
  • Clipping
  • Endovascular
  • Flow diversion
  • Iatrogenic
  • Infection
  • Pipeline
  • Pseudoaneurysm
  • Sacrifice
  • Subarachnoid hemorrhage
  • Trauma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Chen, S. H., McCarthy, D. J., Sheinberg, D., Hanel, R., Sur, S., Jabbour, P., Atallah, E., Chalouhi, N., Dumont, A., Amenta, P., Hasan, D., Raper, D., Liu, K., Jane, J. A., Crowley, R. W., Aguilar-Salinas, P., Bentley, J., Monteith, S., Mitchell, B. D., ... Starke, R. M. (2019). Pipeline Embolization Device for the Treatment of Intracranial Pseudoaneurysms. World neurosurgery, 127, e86-e93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2019.02.135