Search

Although endovascular treatment is a promising approach, blood blister-like aneurysms (BBAs) still present treatment challenges. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of flow diverter device-assisted coiling (FDDAC) for the treatment of BBAs, which are broad based and friable with a high rebleeding risk. Eight patients (five females and three males) who presented with subarachnoid hemorrhages (SAH) due to BBA ruptures between May 2020 and May 2022 were retrospectively enrolled. All patients were treated by flow diverter device (Tubridge) adjunctive coil embolization using a semi-deploying technique. The demographic information, angiographic data, interval between admission and treatment, materials, therapy, clinical outcomes (including periprocedural and intraprocedural mortality and morbidity), and follow-up results of all patients were reviewed. The mean age of the patients with BBAs was 48.5 years (range 31–62 years); aneurysm sizes ranged from 2.2 × 1.7 mm to 4.6 × 3.2 mm, and the median Hunt–Hess score was 3. All aneurysms were completely closed at follow-up, and all 8 patients had excellent clinical outcomes (modified Rankin scores = 0–2) at discharge. Angiograms showed complete aneurysm occlusion after 6 months to 1 year. In addition, there were no cases of re-rupture, re-treatment, or recurrence of the aneurysms. FDDAC is safe to use in patients with BBAs and provides an alternative treatment option for this disease.

Flow diverter devices have gained wide acceptance for the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Most studies are based on the treatment of large aneurysms harboring on the carotid syphon. However, during the last years the “off-label” use of these stents has widely grown up even if not supported by randomized studies. This review examines the relevant literature concerning “off-label” indications for flow diverter devices, such as for distal aneurysms, bifurcation aneurysms, small aneurysms, recurrent aneurysms, and direct carotid cavernous fistulas.

Objective: Flow diverter devices are increasingly used in the treatment of posterior circulation aneurysms, sometimes necessarily involving ostia of side branches and perforators. The aim of this study was to identify the hemodynamic influence of flow diverters on side branches and perforators of the posterior circulation.Methods: We performed a retrospective study of consecutive patients treated by a flow diverter device for posterior circulation aneurysms with anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) or posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) involvement. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) were used to discern hemodynamic changes of branches after deployment of the flow diverter.Results: We studied 18 branches from 17 patients (mean age, 50.72 ± 8.17 years). No branches were occluded on immediate angiography and later follow-up. Average flow velocity in aneurysms decreased from 0.077 ± 0.065 m/s to 0.025 ± 0.025 m/s (p < 0.01). Average flow velocity in branch ostia decreased from 0.29 ± 0.14 m/s to 0.27 ± 0.16 m/s (p = 0.189). The difference in flow velocity reduction ratio between aneurysms and branches was statistically significant (68.8 vs. 9.5%; p < 0.001). The mean pressure in branch ostia increased from 10,717.4 ± 489.0 to 10,859.0 ± 643.4 Pa (p < 0.01).Conclusion: While a flow diverter device is capable of slowing down aneurysmal inflow, it is unable to block the flow into branches and perforators when used in the treatment of posterior circulation aneurysms; flow velocity in branches even increased in some cases. With a low branch occlusion ratio, it may be acceptable to cover posterior circulation branches and perforators if unavoidable.

Background Flow diverter devices are increasingly used for endovascular treatment of internal carotid artery aneurysms. Treatment of ophthalmic segment aneurysms with flow diverter devices also includes coverage of the ophthalmic artery but may result in complications. It is unclear, however, whether these devices mechanically block blood flow in the ophthalmic artery. Also unclear is the relationship between deployment of a flow diverter device and post-treatment occlusion. We studied hemodynamic changes in the ophthalmic artery after deployment of a flow diverter device to determine the relationship between those changes and post-stent occlusion of the artery. Methods We analyzed hemodynamic modifications in the ophthalmic artery in 21 patients (19 women, 2 men; mean age 53.43 ± 7.32 years) treated by a single pipeline embolization device. Patient-specific geometries were determined from three-dimensional digital subtraction angiography and the stenting process was simulated. Computational fluid dynamics technology was used to analyze the change in ophthalmic artery hemodynamics. We compared pre-treatment and post-treatment flow velocity of the ophthalmic artery. Results Among the 21 patients with aneurysms located in the ophthalmic segment, no ophthalmic artery occlusion was found during immediate or follow-up angiography. Post-stent flow velocity in the ophthalmic artery decreased from 0.35 ± 0.19 to 0.33 ± 0.20 m/s, with the difference not being statistically significant (P = 0.106). Conclusion Our results showed no significant change in ophthalmic artery blood flow after pipeline embolization device deployment. Hence, post-stent occlusion of the ophthalmic artery could not be explained by reduced blood flow. Delayed thrombosis and neointimal formation maybe the keys to ophthalmic artery occlusion and need further investigation. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12967-019-1913-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Experience with the endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms by the Flow Re-Direction Endoluminal Device (FRED) is still limited. The aim of this study is to discuss the results and complications of this new flow diverter device (FDD). Methods Between November 2013 and April 2015, 20 patients (15 female and five male) harboring 24 cerebral aneurysms were treated with FRED FDD in a single center. Results Complete occlusion was obtained in 20/24 aneurysms (83 %) and partial occlusion in four (17 %). Intraprocedural technical complication occurred in one case (4 %) and postprocedural complications in three (12 %). None reported neurological deficits (mRS= 0). All FRED were patent at followup. No early or delayed aneurysm rupture, no subarachnoid (SAH) or intraparenchymal hemorrhage (IPH) no ischemic complications and no deaths occurred. Conclusions Endovascular treatment with FRED FDD is a safe treatment for unruptured cerebral aneurysms, resulting in a high rate of occlusion. The FRED is substantially equivalent to the other known FDDs, which show similar functions and technical profiles.