Abstract
Purpose
Long-term data on aneurysm treatment with flow-diverting stents are still sparse, and follow-up protocols differ widely between institutions. We present long-term results, with a focus on the usefulness of contrast-enhanced MR angiography (ceMRA).
Materials and Methods
Interventions and follow-up imaging of patients with aneurysms treated by flow-diverting stents (“Pipeline,” “Silk” and “FRED” models) without additional coiling were analyzed. All MRI scans included dedicated two-phase ceMRA. Aneurysm occlusion rates, size of the aneurysmal sac and complications were evaluated on MRI and digital subtraction angiography (DSA), where available. The ability of ceMRA to depict aneurysm occlusion and stent patency was graded on a three-point scale.
Results
Twenty-five patients with 102 MRI scans were included. The median duration of follow-up was 830 days. Aneurysm occlusion rates were 52% at 3 months (10 of 19 patients), 72% at 6 months (18/25) and 84% overall (21/25). Shrinkage of the aneurysmal sac was found in 19 patients (76%) and in 12 cases to <50% of the original size (48%). CeMRA assessability of aneurysmal occlusion was graded as good in all cases. When compared to DSA (18 cases), ceMRA had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 91% regarding aneurysm remnant detection. Assessability of the stent lumen varied and was limited in most cases.
Conclusions
Flow-diverter treatment achieves high occlusion rates and can cause major aneurysm shrinkage. CeMRA is highly valuable regarding imaging of the aneurysmal sac. There are limitations regarding the assessability of the stent lumen on ceMRA.
Level of Evidence
Level 4, Case Series.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Kallmes DF, Ding YH, Dai D, Kadirvel R, Lewis DA, Cloft HJ. A new endoluminal, flow-disrupting device for treatment of saccular aneurysms. Stroke J Cereb Circu. 2007;38(8):2346–52. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.106.479576.
Becske T, Kallmes DF, Saatci I, McDougall CG, Szikora I, Lanzino G, Moran CJ, Woo HH, Lopes DK, Berez AL, Cher DJ, Siddiqui AH, Levy EI, Albuquerque FC, Fiorella DJ, Berentei Z, Marosfoi M, Cekirge SH, Nelson PK. Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology. 2013;267(3):858–68. doi:10.1148/radiol.13120099.
Keskin F, Erdi F, Kaya B, Poyraz N, Keskin S, Kalkan E, Ozbek O, Koc O. Endovascular treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms by pipeline flow-diverter embolization device: a single-center experience. Neurol Res. 2015;37(4):359–65. doi:10.1179/1743132814y.0000000450.
Lubicz B, Van der Elst O, Collignon L, Mine B, Alghamdi F. Silk flow-diverter stent for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a series of 58 patients with emphasis on long-term results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(3):542–6. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4143.
Lylyk P, Miranda C, Ceratto R, Ferrario A, Scrivano E, Luna HR, Berez AL, Tran Q, Nelson PK, Fiorella D. Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience. Neurosurgery. 2009;64(4):632–42. doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000339109.98070.65 (discussion 642–633; quiz N636).
Arrese I, Sarabia R, Pintado R, Delgado-Rodriguez M. Flow-diverter devices for intracranial aneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurgery. 2013;73(2):193–9. doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000430297.17961.f1 (discussion 199–200).
Briganti F, Leone G, Marseglia M, Mariniello G, Caranci F, Brunetti A, Maiuri F. Endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms using flow-diverter devices: a systematic review. Neuroradiol J. 2015;28(4):365–75. doi:10.1177/1971400915602803.
Briganti F, Napoli M, Leone G, Marseglia M, Mariniello G, Caranci F, Tortora F, Maiuri F. Treatment of intracranial aneurysms by flow diverter devices: long-term results from a single center. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(9):1683–90. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.05.029.
Piano M, Valvassori L, Quilici L, Pero G, Boccardi E. Midterm and long-term follow-up of cerebral aneurysms treated with flow diverter devices: a single-center experience. J Neurosurg. 2013;118(2):408–16. doi:10.3171/2012.10.jns112222.
Cohen JE, Gomori JM, Moscovici S, Leker RR, Itshayek E. Delayed complications after flow-diverter stenting: reactive in-stent stenosis and creeping stents. J Clin Neurosci. 2014;21(7):1116–22. doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2013.11.010.
John S, Bain M, Hui F, Hussain MS, Masaryk T, Rasmussen P, Toth G. Long-term follow-up of in-stent stenosis after pipeline flow diversion treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2015;. doi:10.1227/neu.0000000000001146.
Berge J, Tourdias T, Moreau JF, Barreau X, Dousset V. Perianeurysmal brain inflammation after flow-diversion treatment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(10):1930–4. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2710.
Brinjikji W, Murad MH, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ, Kallmes DF. Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke J Cereb Circ. 2013;44(2):442–7. doi:10.1161/strokeaha.112.678151.
Colby GP, Lin LM, Coon AL. Revisiting the risk of intraparenchymal hemorrhage following aneurysm treatment by flow diversion. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(7):E107. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3201 (author reply E108).
Cruz JP, Chow M, O’Kelly C, Marotta B, Spears J, Montanera W, Fiorella D, Marotta T. Delayed ipsilateral parenchymal hemorrhage following flow diversion for the treatment of anterior circulation aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(4):603–8. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3065.
Kulcsar Z, Houdart E, Bonafe A, Parker G, Millar J, Goddard AJ, Renowden S, Gal G, Turowski B, Mitchell K, Gray F, Rodriguez M, van den Berg R, Gruber A, Desal H, Wanke I, Rufenacht DA. Intra-aneurysmal thrombosis as a possible cause of delayed aneurysm rupture after flow-diversion treatment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(1):20–5. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2370.
Johnston SC, Higashida RT, Barrow DL, Caplan LR, Dion JE, Hademenos G, Hopkins LN, Molyneux A, Rosenwasser RH, Vinuela F, Wilson CB. Recommendations for the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Committee on Cerebrovascular Imaging of the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology. Stroke J Cereb Circ. 2002;33(10):2536–44.
Ertl L, Holtmannspotter M, Patzig M, Bruckmann H, Fesl G. Use of flow-diverting devices in fusiform vertebrobasilar giant aneurysms: a report on periprocedural course and long-term follow-up. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35(7):1346–52. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3859.
Kamran M, Yarnold J, Grunwald IQ, Byrne JV. Assessment of angiographic outcomes after flow diversion treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a new grading schema. Neuroradiology. 2011;53(7):501–8. doi:10.1007/s00234-010-0767-5.
Darsaut TE, Bing F, Salazkin I, Gevry G, Raymond J. Flow diverters can occlude aneurysms and preserve arterial branches: a new experimental model. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(10):2004–9. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3075.
Kallmes DF, Hanel R, Lopes D, Boccardi E, Bonafé A, Cekirge S, Fiorella D, Jabbour P, Levy E, McDougall C, Siddiqui A, Szikora I, Woo H, Albuquerque F, Bozorgchami H, Dashti SR, Delgado Almadoz JE, Kelly ME, Turner R 4th, Woodward BK, Brinjikji W, Lanzino G, Lylyk P. International retrospective study of pipeline embolization device: a multicenter aneurysm treatment study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(1):108–15. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4111.
Becske T, Potts MB, Shapiro M, Kallmes DF, Brinjikji W, Saatci I, McDougall CG, Szikora I, Lanzino G, Moran CJ, Woo HH, Lopes DK, Berez AL, Cher DJ, Siddiqui AH, Levy EI, Albuquerque FC, Fiorella DJ, Berentei Z, Marosföi M, Cekirge SH, Nelson PK. Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: 3-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg. 2016;14:1–8. doi:10.3171/2015.6.JNS15311.
Deutschmann HA, Wehrschuetz M, Augustin M, Niederkorn K, Klein GE. Long-term follow-up after treatment of intracranial aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device: results from a single center. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(3):481–6. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2790.
Szikora I, Marosfoi M, Salomvary B, Berentei Z, Gubucz I. Resolution of mass effect and compression symptoms following endoluminal flow diversion for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(5):935–9. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3547.
Kovacs A, Mohlenbruch M, Hadizadeh DR, Seifert M, Greschus S, Clusmann H, Willinek WA, Flacke S, Urbach H. Noninvasive imaging after stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms: comparison of 3-T magnetic resonance imaging and 64-row multidetector computed tomography–a pilot study. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2011;35(5):573–82. doi:10.1097/RCT.0b013e318224e528.
Schlotzer W, Huber R, Schmitz BL. Stent-assisted intracranial angioplasty: potentials and limitations of pre- and postinterventional CT angiography. RoFo: Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin. 2009;181(2):121–8. doi:10.1055/s-2008-1027889.
Anzalone N, Scomazzoni F, Cirillo M, Righi C, Simionato F, Cadioli M, Iadanza A, Kirchin MA, Scotti G. Follow-up of coiled cerebral aneurysms at 3T: comparison of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography and contrast-enhanced MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29(8):1530–6. doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1166.
Deutschmann HA, Augustin M, Simbrunner J, Unger B, Schoellnast H, Fritz GA, Klein GE. Diagnostic accuracy of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography compared with digital subtraction angiography for follow-up of coiled intracranial aneurysms: influence of aneurysm size. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28(4):628–34.
Ferre JC, Carsin-Nicol B, Morandi X, Carsin M, de Kersaint-Gilly A, Gauvrit JY, Desal HA. Time-of-flight MR angiography at 3T versus digital subtraction angiography in the imaging follow-up of 51 intracranial aneurysms treated with coils. Eur J Radiol. 2009;72(3):365–9. doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.08.005.
Gauvrit JY, Leclerc X, Caron S, Taschner CA, Lejeune JP, Pruvo JP. Intracranial aneurysms treated with Guglielmi detachable coils: imaging follow-up with contrast-enhanced MR angiography. Stroke J Cereb Circ. 2006;37(4):1033–7. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000209236.06451.3b.
Thomas B, Sunaert S, Thamburaj K, Wilms G. Spurious absence of signal on 3D time-of-flight MR angiograms on 1 and 3 tesla magnets in cerebral arteries associated with a giant ophthalmic segment aneurysm the need for alternative techniques. JBR-BTR organe de la Societe royale belge de radiologie (SRBR) = orgaan van de Koninklijke Belgische Vereniging voor Radiologie (KBVR). 2005;88(5):241–4.
Attali J, Benaissa A, Soize S, Kadziolka K, Portefaix C, Pierot L. Follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated by flow diverter: comparison of three-dimensional time-of-flight MR angiography (3D-TOF-MRA) and contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) sequences with digital subtraction angiography as the gold standard. J Neurointerventional Surg. 2016;8(1):81–6. doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011449.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest regarding this study.
Ethics and Consent
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This is a retrospective study. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Patzig, M., Forbrig, R., Ertl, L. et al. Intracranial Aneurysms Treated by Flow-Diverting Stents: Long-Term Follow-Up with Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40, 1713–1722 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1732-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00270-017-1732-z