Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background Intracranial dissecting aneurysms present clinical challenges, demanding immediate intervention due to their high bleeding risk. While traditional treatments have limitations, the potential of flow diverters shows promise but remains a subject of ongoing debate for optimal management. The aim of this study was assess the safety and efficacy of flow diverters in the treatment of intracranial dissecting aneurysms.
Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following established guidelines. The search encompassed PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase databases up to July 20, 2023. Eligible studies reporting outcomes of interest were included, and relevant data were extracted and analyzed using R software.
Results The analysis, based on data pooled from 20 included studies involving 329 patients, revealed a favorable functional outcome rate of 89.7% at the last follow-up. The mortality rate during the follow-up period was 2.4%, decreasing to 0.9% when excluding the outlier study. In the final angiographic follow-up, a complete occlusion rate of 71.7% and an adequate occlusion rate of 88.3% were observed. Notably, studies with longer angiographic follow-up times exhibited lower rates of complete (P=0.02) and adequate (P<0.01) occlusion. A minimal aneurysm recurrence/rebleeding rate of 0.1% was noted, while in-stent stenosis/thrombosis occurred at a rate of 1.14%. Additionally, ischemic events/infarctions were seen in 3.3% of cases. The need for retreatment was minimal, with a rate of 0.9%, and the technical success rate was impressively high at 99.1%.
Conclusion This study highlights the safety and efficacy of flow diverters in treating intracranial dissecting aneurysms. Further research, encompassing larger multicenter studies with extended follow-up periods, is crucial for comprehending occlusion dynamics, refining treatment strategies, improving long-term outcomes, and addressing methodological limitations.
- Flow Diverter
- Aneurysm
- Dissection
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
MA and AH are joint first authors.
Contributors The inception of the project was a collaborative effort by DFK, MA, and AH. During the subsequent revision stages, DFK, SG and HK made significant scientific contributions, offering valuable insights. MA and AH were instrumental in conducting database searches, extracting data, drafting, and critically revising the content to ensure the incorporation of essential intellectual contributions. PV and PJ played pivotal roles in data analysis and interpretation. The final manuscript was thoroughly reviewed and approved by all authors.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests DFK holds equity in Nested Knowledge, Superior Medical Editors, Conway Medical, Marblehead Medical, and Piraeus Medical. He receives grant support from MicroVention, Medtronic, Balt, and Insera Therapeutics. Additionally, he has served on the Data Safety Monitoring Board for Vesalio and has received royalties from Medtronic.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.