Nohra Chalouhi, Mario Zanaty, Alex Whiting, Steven Yang, Stavropoula Tjoumakaris, David Hasan, Robert M. Starke, Shannon Hann, Christine Hammer, David Kung, Robert Rosenwasser and Pascal Jabbour
Flow diverters are increasingly used for treatment of intracranial aneurysms. In most series, the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) was used for the treatment of large, giant, complex, and fusiform aneurysms. Little is known about the use of the PED in small aneurysms. The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the PED in small aneurysms (≤ 7 mm).
A total of 100 consecutive patients were treated with the PED at the authors' institution between May 2011 and September 2013. Data on procedural safety and efficacy were retrospectively collected.
The mean aneurysm size was 5.2 ± 1.5 mm. Seven patients (7%) had sustained a subarachnoid hemorrhage. All except 5 aneurysms (95%) arose from the anterior circulation. The number of PEDs used was 1.2 per aneurysm. Symptomatic procedure-related complications occurred in 3 patients (3%): 1 distal parenchymal hemorrhage that was managed conservatively and 2 ischemic events. At the latest follow-up (mean 6.3 months), 54 (72%) aneurysms were completely occluded (100%), 10 (13%) were nearly completely occluded (≥ 90%), and 11 (15%) were incompletely occluded (< 90%). Six aneurysms (8%) required further treatment. Increasing aneurysm size (OR 3.8, 95% CI 0.99–14; p = 0.05) predicted retreatment. All patients achieved a favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale Score 0–2) at follow-up.
In this study, treatment of small aneurysms with the PED was associated with low complication rates and high aneurysm occlusion rates. These findings suggest that the PED is a safe and effective alternative to conventional endovascular techniques for small aneurysms. Randomized trials with long-term follow-up are necessary to determine the optimal treatment that leads to the highest rate of obliteration and the best clinical outcomes.
Nohra Chalouhi, Alex Whiting, Eliza C. Anderson, Samantha Witte, Mario Zanaty, Stavropoula Tjoumakaris, L. Fernando Gonzalez, David Hasan, Robert M. Starke, Shannon Hann, George M. Ghobrial, Robert Rosenwasser and Pascal Jabbour
It is common practice to use a new contralateral bur hole for ventriculoperitoneal shunt (VPS) placement in subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) patients with an existing ventriculostomy. At Thomas Jefferson University and Jefferson Hospital for Neuroscience, the authors have primarily used the ventriculostomy site for the VPS. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety of the 2 techniques in patients with SAH.
The rates of VPS-related hemorrhage, infection, and proximal revision were compared between the 2 techniques in 523 patients undergoing VPS placement (same site in 464 and contralateral site in 59 patients).
The rate of new VPS-related hemorrhage was significantly higher in the contralateral-site group (1.7%) than in the same-site group (0%; p = 0.006). The rate of VPS infection did not differ between the 2 groups (6.4% for same site vs 5.1% for contralateral site; p = 0.7). In multivariate analysis, higher Hunt and Hess grades (p = 0.05) and open versus endovascular treatment (p = 0.04) predicted shunt infection, but the VPS technique was not a predictive factor (p = 0.9). The rate of proximal shunt revision was 6% in the same-site group versus 8.5% in the contralateralsite group (p = 0.4). In multivariate analysis, open surgery was the only factor predicting proximal VPS revision (p = 0.05).
The results of this study suggest that the use of the ventriculostomy site for VPS placement may be feasible and safe and may not add morbidity (infection or need for revision) compared with the use of a fresh contralateral site. This rapid and simple technique also was associated with a lower risk of shunt-related hemorrhage. While both techniques appear to be feasible and safe, a definitive answer to the question of which technique is superior awaits a higher level of medical evidence.
Nohra Chalouhi, Stavropoula Tjoumakaris, Robert M. Starke, David Hasan, Nimrita Sidhu, Saurabh Singhal, Shannon Hann, L. Fernando Gonzalez, Robert Rosenwasser and Pascal Jabbour
Endovascular therapy has become a widely used method for achieving arterial recanalization in patients who are ineligible for intravenous thrombolysis or those in whom it is unsuccessful. Young stroke patients with large vessel occlusions may particularly benefit from endovascular intervention. This study aims to assess the authors' experience with the use of modern endovascular techniques to treat young patients (≤ 55 years old) with acute ischemic stroke and large vessel occlusions.
Young patients (≤ 55 years old) undergoing endovascular intervention for acute ischemic stroke at the authors' institution were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Only those patients with a confirmed large vessel occlusion were included. Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores were determined at 90 days during a follow-up visit. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine predictors of outcome (mRS score 0–2).
A total of 45 patients met the inclusion criteria. The mean age of the patients in this series was 45 ± 9.6 years. The mean admission NIH Stroke Scale score was 14.1 ± 5 (median 13.5). Mechanical thrombectomy was performed using the Solitaire FR device in 13 (29%) patients and the Merci/Penumbra systems in 32 (71%) patients. The rate of successful recanalization (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] scale Grade II–III) was 93% (42/45). Only 1 patient (2.2%) had a symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage following intervention. One patient (2.2%) sustained a vessel perforation intraoperatively. The rate of 90-day favorable outcome (mRS score 0–2) was 77.5% and the rate of 90-day satisfactory outcome (mRS score 0–3) was 90%. The 90-day mortality rate was 7.5%. In multivariate analysis, postprocedure TIMI grade was the only statistically significant independent predictor of 90-day outcome (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.01–1.19; p = 0.05).
The results of this study demonstrate that endovascular therapy provides remarkably high rates of arterial recanalization and favorable outcomes in young patients with acute ischemic stroke and large vessel occlusions. These findings support aggressive interventional strategies in these patients. Randomized, controlled trials reflecting modern acute ischemic stroke treatment will be needed to confirm the findings of this study.