Search

Introduction: Conventionally, one branch of the superficial temporal artery (STA) is utilized to revascularize the middle cerebral artery (MCA). However, there is the possibility of utilizing both branches of the STA when performing the bypass, characterizing the double-barrel (DB) STA-MCA bypass. Notably, a lack of studies evaluating this technique led the authors to conduct a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were searched systematically for publications of DB-STA-MCA bypass on November 1st, 2023. The findings were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Case reports were not included for statistical analysis purposes. Results: The review included 408 patients and 534 bypasses from 34 studies. The main etiology was Moyamoya disease (64.6%), followed by cerebral ischemia (22.2%) and aneurysms (12.5%). The median of the mean follow-ups of each study was 12.8 months (range 1.5–87.9). The postoperative patency was 100%. The follow-up patency was 98% (95% CI: 96%-100%; I2 = 0%). The procedure-related mortality was 0% (95% CI: 0%-1%; I2 = 0%). Aneurysms obtained 87% (95% CI: 72%-100%; I2 = 4%) of good clinical outcomes, while Moyamoya disease yielded a rate of 70% (95% CI: 10%—100%; I2 = 97%). Ischemic complications occurred at a rate of 6% (95% CI: 2%—11%; I2 = 36%), while hemorrhagic occurred at 6% (95% CI: 1%—11%; I2 = 56%). Hyperperfusion syndrome rate was calculated as 18% (7%—30%; I2 = 55%) for Moyamoya disease. Conclusions: The procedure appears to be safe, with excellent patency rates. The clinical efficacy for ischemic and Moyamoya diseases warrants further standardized robust investigation with a broader number of patients, and aneurysm studies are required to enhance sample sizes. The main complication for the Moyamoya subgroup is hyperperfusion syndrome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Low-profile stents may provide significant advantages in Y-stent-assisted coiling due to their miniaturized design and capability to be delivered through a 0.0165-inch microcatheter. We aim to investigate the safety and efficacy of using these newer versions of stents in Y-stent-assisted coiling for the treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms. We conducted a systematic review of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2023, following the PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included ≥ 5 patients with intracranial wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms treated with Y-stent-assisted coiling using low-profile stents, providing angiographic and clinical outcomes. Two authors independently handled the search and selection. Primary outcomes were immediate and follow-up aneurysm occlusion, procedure-related complications, aneurysm recanalization, and retreatment. Secondary outcomes included technical success, procedure-related morbidity, procedure-related mortality, procedure-related stroke, and in-stent stenosis at follow-up. We analyzed the data using random-effects meta-analysis. In total, 19 studies including 507 patients with 509 aneurysms were included. 95% of the treated aneurysms were managed using the crossing Y-configuration. Technical success rate was 99%. Immediate adequate aneurysm occlusion was 90%. Follow-up angiographies were available for 443 aneurysms. The mean angiographic follow-up duration was 15.6 ± 1.9 months. The rates for follow-up adequate aneurysm occlusion and complete occlusion were 98% and 89%, respectively. After a mean clinical follow-up of 15 ± 2.4 months, a good clinical outcome was observed in 98% of patients. Overall, procedure-related morbidity and mortality rates were 1.3%, and 0.4%, respectively. Low-profile stents in Y-stent-assisted coiling outperform previous stent versions in terms of safety, efficacy, and technical success rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the last decades, minimally invasive techniques have revolutionized the endovascular treatment (EVT) of brain aneurysms. In parallel, the development of conscious sedation (CS), a potentially less harmful anesthetic protocol than general anesthesia (GA), has led to the course optimization of surgeries, patient outcomes, and healthcare costs. Nevertheless, the feasibility and safety of EVT of brain aneurysms under CS have yet to be assessed thoroughly. Herein, we systematically reviewed the medical literature about this procedure. In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane Library) were queried to identify articles describing the EVT of brain aneurysms under CS. Successful procedural completion, complete aneurysm occlusion outcomes, intraoperative complications, clinical outcomes, and mortality rates assessed the feasibility and safety. Our search strategy yielded 567 records, of which 11 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. These studies entailed a total of 1142 patients (40.7% females), 1183 intracranial aneurysms (78.4% in the anterior circulation and 60.9% unruptured at presentation), and 1391 endovascular procedures (91.9% performed under CS). EVT modalities under CS included coiling alone (63.2%), flow diversion (17.7%), stent-assisted coiling (10.6%), stenting alone (6.5%), onyx embolization alone (1.7%), onyx + stenting (0.2%), and onyx + coiling (0.2%). CS was achieved by combining two or more anesthetics, such as midazolam, fentanyl, and remifentanil. Selection criteria for CS were heterogenous and included patients' history of pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases, outweighing the benefits of CS versus GA, a Hunt and Hess score of I–II, a median score of 3 in the American Society of Anesthesiology scale, and patient's compliance with elective CS. Procedures were deemed successful or achieving complete aneurysm occlusion in 88.1% and 9.4% of reported cases, respectively. Good clinical outcomes were described in 90.4% of patients with available data at follow-up (mean time: 10.7 months). The procedural complication rate was 16%, and the mortality rate was 2.8%. No complications or mortality were explicitly attributed to CS. On the other hand, procedure abortion and conversion from CS to GA were deemed necessary in 5% and 1% of cases, respectively. The present study highlights the feasibility of performing EVT of brain aneurysms under CS as an alternative anesthetic protocol to GA. However, the limited nature of observational studies, methodological quality, the predominant absence of a comparative GA group, and clinical data during follow-up restrict a conclusive statement about the safety of EVT under CS. Accordingly, further research endeavors are warranted toward a higher level of evidence that can be translated into surgical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treating complex posterior circulation aneurysms poses challenges, and extracranial to intracranial (EC-IC) bypass techniques are potential therapeutic options. However, the safety and efficacy of this approach for posterior circulation aneurysms remain unclear. The study's objective was to assess the safety and efficacy of EC-IC bypass in these aneurysms. Adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we conducted a systematic review on EC-IC revascularization for posterior circulation aneurysms. Included studies had at least 4 patients and reported data on mortality, patency, complications, or clinical outcomes. Favorable clinical outcomes were defined as modified Rankin Scale below 3 or Glasgow Outcome Scale above 3, and complications were any issues related to the bypass procedure. From 3036 articles reviewed, 22 studies involving 196 patients who underwent 210 EC-IC bypass procedures for posterior circulation aneurysms were selected. The median follow-up period of 14 studies was 31.66 months (6–61 months). Final follow-up indicated a high bypass patency rate of 96% [95% confidence interval [CI]: 91%–100%; I2 = 12%], with a mortality rate of 5% [95% CI: 1%–9%; I2 = 0%]. Additionally, 83% [95% CI: 70%–96%; I2 = 77%] of patients showed good outcomes at the last follow-up. Complications were observed in 40% [95% CI: 26%–55%; I2 = 80%]. Heterogeneity was associated with specific studies. EC-IC bypass procedures are a viable treatment option for posterior circulation aneurysms, with high bypass patency rates and favorable clinical outcomes. However, complications, especially neurological deficits, exist. Open revascularization remains essential for neurovascular surgeons dealing with complex aneurysms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the recent increase in publications centered on intracranial-intracranial (IC-IC) bypasses for complex aneurysms, there is no systematic evidence regarding their outcomes. The purpose was to assess the outcomes of patients subjected to IC-IC bypass for aneurysms. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis, a systematic review was conducted. Criteria for inclusion entailed studies with a cohort of at least 4 patients having undergone IC-IC bypass for aneurysms, detailing at least one outcome, such as patency, clinical outcomes, complications, and procedure-related mortality. When the study included patients who had undergone extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass, the authors extracted the patency and clinical data to juxtapose them with the results of IC-IC. Of the 2509 shortlisted studies, 22 met our inclusion criteria, encompassing 255 patients and 263 IC-IC bypass procedures. The IC-IC bypass procedure exhibited a patency rate of 93% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89%–95%). The patency rate of IC-IC and EC-IC bypasses did not significantly differ (odds ratio = 0.60 [95% CI: 0.18–1.96]). Concerning clinical outcomes, 91% of the IC-IC patients had positive results (95% CI: 85%–97%), with no significant disparity between the IC-IC and EC-IC groups (odds ratio = 1.29 [95% CI: 0.43–3.88]). After analysis, the complication rate was 11% (95% CI: 5%–18%). Procedure-related mortality was 1% (95% CI: 0%–4%). IC-IC bypass is valuable for the treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms, boasting high patency and positive clinical outcomes. Complications are unusual, and procedure-related mortality is minimal. Comparing IC-IC and EC-IC led to no significant differences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When traditional therapies are unsuitable, revascularization becomes essential for managing posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) or vertebral artery aneurysms. Notably, the PICA-PICA bypass has emerged as a promising option, overshadowing the occipital artery-PICA (OA-PICA) bypass. The objective was to compare the safety and efficacy of OA-PICA and PICA-PICA bypasses. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of OA-PICA and PICA-PICA bypasses for treating posterior circulation aneurysms. We analyzed 13 studies for the PICA-PICA bypass and 16 studies on the OA-PICA bypass, involving 84 and 110 patients, respectively. The median average follow-up for PICA-PICA bypass was 8 months (2–50.3 months), while for OA-PICA, it was 27.8 months (6–84 months). The patency rate for OA-PICA was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92%–100%) and 100% (95% CI: 95%–100%) for PICA-PICA. Complication rates were 29% (95% CI: 10%–47%) for OA-PICA and 12% (95% CI: 3%–21%) for PICA-PICA. Good clinical outcomes were observed in 71% (95% CI: 52%–90%) of OA-PICA patients and 87% (95% CI: 75%–100%) of PICA-PICA patients. Procedure-related mortality was 1% (95% CI: 0%–6%) for OA-PICA and 1% (95% CI: 0%–10%) for PICA-PICA. Both procedures have demonstrated promising results in efficacy and safety. PICA-PICA exhibits slightly better patency rates, better clinical outcomes, and fewer complications, but with a lack of substantial follow-up and a smaller sample size. The choice between these procedures should be based on the surgeon's expertise and the patient's anatomy. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]