Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Case series
The Medina Embolic Device: early clinical experience from a single center
  1. Marta Aguilar Perez1,
  2. Pervinder Bhogal2,
  3. Rosa Martinez Moreno3,
  4. Hansjörg Bäzner4,
  5. Oliver Ganslandt5,
  6. Hans Henkes6
  1. 1Klinik für Neuroradiologie, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  2. 2Interventional Neuroradiology, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  3. 3Department of Neuroradiology, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
  4. 4Klinik für Neurologie, Klinikum Stuttgart, Bürgerhospital, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  5. 5Department of Neurosurgery, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
  6. 6Klinik für Neuroradiologie, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Pervinder Bhogal, Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, 70174, Germany; bhogalweb{at}aol.com

Abstract

Objective To report our initial experience with the Medina Embolic Device (MED) in unruptured intracranial aneurysms either as sole treatment or in conjunction with additional devices.

Methods 15 consecutive patients (6 women, 9 men) with unruptured aneurysms were treated between September 2015 and April 2016. The aneurysm fundus measured at least 5 mm. We evaluated the angiographic appearances of treated aneurysms at the end of the procedure and at follow-up, the clinical status, complications, and requirement for adjunctive devices.

Results The MED was successfully deployed in all but one case and adjunctive devices were required in 10 cases. Aneurysm locations were middle cerebral artery bifurcation (n=3), internal carotid artery (ICA) bifurcation (n=1), supraclinoid ICA (n=5), posterior communicating artery (n=1), anterior communicating artery (n=2), cavernous ICA (n=2), distal basilar sidewall (n=1), basilar tip (n=1). Three patients had complications although none could be attributed to the MED. Immediate angiographic results were modified Raymond-Roy classification (mRRC) I=1, mRRC II=5, mRRC IIIa=3, mRRC IIIb=5, and one patient showed contrast stasis within the fundus of the aneurysm. Follow-up angiography was available in 11 patients, with four showing complete aneurysm exclusion, six with stable remnants and one patient with an enlarging neck remnant.

Conclusions The MED represents a major step forward in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. It can result in rapid exclusion of an aneurysm from the circulation and has a good safety profile. We believe that the true value of the MED will be in combining its use with adjunctive devices such as endoluminal flow diverters that will result in rapid aneurysmal exclusion.

  • Aneurysm
  • Flow Diverter
  • Coil

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors MAP, PB and RMM: manuscript preparation and data collection; OG and HB: manuscript review, editing; HH: manuscript review.

  • Competing interests MAP and RMM serve as proctors and consultants for phenox GmbH with moderate financial compensation. HH is a co-founder and shareholder of phenox GmbH.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.