Summary of previously reported cases with use of flow diverting devices for the treatment of a direct carotid–cavernous sinus fistula
| Study | No of dCCFs treated with flow diversion | Study highlights |
| Amuluru et al 201611 | 1 | Iatrogenic dCCF successfully treated with PED |
| Nossek et al 201514 | 1 | Ruptured giant cavernous ICA aneurysm and associated dCCF successfully treated with overlapping PEDs and transarterial coiling |
| Pradeep et al 201616 | 2 | Post-traumatic dCCFs treated using a combination of transarterial PED deployment and transvenous embolization |
| Nadarajah et al 201213 | 1 | Post-traumatic dCCF successfully treated with multi-device PED construct |
| Iancu et al 201512 | 1 | Iatrogenic dCCF treated with transarterial coil embolization under balloon protection with subsequent deployment of a Silk flow diverting stent to treat residual shunting |
| Ogilvy et al 201715 | 3 | Post-traumatic dCCFs treated with transvenous and/or transarterial techniques supplemented with adjunctive flow diverter device placement |
| Wendl et al 201717 | 14 | Various etiology dCCFs treated with transarterial and/or transvenous techniques supplemented with flow diverting devices; for 7 of these patients, the etiology of the dCCF was iatrogenic and the injury and flow diverting device treatment occurred during the same index procedure; for 4 of the remaining cases, the flow diverter was deployed as an adjunctive treatment after the initial treatment failed to obliterate the fistula on angiographic follow-up |
dCCF, direct carotid–cavernous sinus fistula; ICA, internal carotid artery; PED, pipeline embolization device.