Hydrogel versus Bare Platinum Coils in Patients with Large or Recurrent Aneurysms Prone to Recurrence after Endovascular Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Guglielmi G,
   3. Viñuela F,
   4. Dion J, et al

   . Electrothrombosis of saccular aneurysms via endovascular approach, part 2: preliminary clinical experience. J Neurosurg 1991;75:8–14 doi:10.3171/jns.1991.75.1.0008 pmid:2045924

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Guglielmi G,
   3. Viñuela F,
   4. Sepetka I, et al

   . Electrothrombosis of saccular aneurysms via endovascular approach, part 1: electrochemical basis, technique, and experimental results. J Neurosurg 1991;75:1–7 doi:10.3171/jns.1991.75.1.0001 pmid:2045891

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Molyneux A,
   3. Kerr R,
   4. Stratton I, et al

   ; International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) Collaborative Group. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002;360:1267–74 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11314-6 pmid:12414200

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Darsaut TE,
   3. Findlay JM,
   4. Raymond J

   . The design of the Canadian UnRuptured Endovascular versus Surgery (CURES) trial. Can J Neurol Sci 2011;38:236–41 doi:10.1017/S0317167100011392 pmid:21320826

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Raymond J,
   3. Molyneux AJ,
   4. Fox AJ, et al

   ; TEAM Collaborative Group. The TEAM trial: safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the prevention of aneurysmal hemorrhages: a randomized comparison with indefinite deferral of treatment in 2002 patients followed for 10 years. Trials 2008;9:43 doi:10.1186/1745-6215-9-43 pmid:18631395

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   2. Crobeddu E,
   3. Lanzino G,
   4. Kallmes DF, et al

   . Review of 2 decades of aneurysm-recurrence literature, part 2: managing recurrence after endovascular coiling. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:481–85 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2958 pmid:22422182

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Naggara ON,
   3. Lecler A,
   4. Oppenheim C, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of intracranial unruptured aneurysms: a systematic review of the literature on safety with emphasis on subgroup analyses. Radiology 2012;263:828–35 doi:10.1148/radiol.12112114 pmid:22623696

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   2. Raymond J,
   3. Guilbert F,
   4. Weill A, et al

   . Long-term angiographic recurrences after selective endovascular treatment of aneurysms with detachable coils. Stroke 2003;34:1398–403 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000073841.88563.E9 pmid:12775880

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Molyneux AJ,
   3. Birks J,
   4. Clarke A, et al

   . The durability of endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping of ruptured cerebral aneurysms: 18 year follow-up of the UK cohort of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT). Lancet 2015;385:691–97 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60975-2 pmid:25465111

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Brinjikji W,
    3. Murad MH,
    4. Lanzino G, et al

    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:442–47 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.678151 pmid:23321438

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    2. Raymond J,
    3. Gentric JC,
    4. Darsaut TE, et al

    . Flow diversion in the treatment of aneurysms: a randomized care trial and registry. J Neurosurg 2016 Nov 4:1–9. [Epub ahead of print] pmid:27813466
12. 12.↵
    2. Hong Y,
    3. Wang YJ,
    4. Deng Z, et al

    . Stent–assisted coiling versus coiling in treatment of intracranial aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014;9:e82311 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0082311 pmid:24454690

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Phan K,
    3. Huo YR,
    4. Jia F, et al

    . Meta-analysis of stent-assisted coiling versus coiling-only for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. J Clin Neurosci 2016;31:15–22 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2016.01.035 pmid:27344091

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. White PM,
    3. Lewis SC,
    4. Gholkar A, et al

    ; HELPS trial collaborators. Hydrogel-coated coils versus bare platinum coils for the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms (HELPS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2011;377:1655–62 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60408-X pmid:21571149

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    2. Broeders JA,
    3. Ahmed Ali U,
    4. Molyneux AJ, et al

    . Bioactive versus bare platinum coils for the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:898–908 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-011881 pmid:26359214

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. McDougall CG,
    3. Johnston SC,
    4. Gholkar A, et al

    ; MAPS Investigators. Bioactive versus bare platinum coils in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: the MAPS (Matrix and Platinum Science) trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:935–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3857 pmid:24481333

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. Coley S,
    3. Sneade M,
    4. Clarke A, et al

    . Cerecyte coil trial: procedural safety and clinical outcomes in patients with ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:474–80 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2836 pmid:22207299

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    2. Molyneux AJ,
    3. Clarke A,
    4. Sneade M, et al

    . Cerecyte coil trial: angiographic outcomes of a prospective randomized trial comparing endovascular coiling of cerebral aneurysms with either Cerecyte or bare platinum coils. Stroke 2012;43:2544–50 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.657254 pmid:22836352

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. Raymond J,
    3. Roy D,
    4. White PM, et al

    ; Icone Collaborative Group. A randomized trial comparing platinum and hydrogel-coated coils in Patients Prone to Recurrence after Endovascular Treatment (the PRET trial). Interv Neuroradiol 2008;14:73–83 pmid:20557789

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Raymond J,
    3. Klink R,
    4. Chagnon M, et al

    ; PRET Collaborative Group. Patients prone to recurrence after endovascular treatment: periprocedural results of the PRET randomized trial on large and recurrent aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1667–76 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4035 pmid:24948508

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Roy D,
    3. Milot G,
    4. Raymond J

    . Endovascular treatment of unruptured aneurysms. Stroke 2001;32:1998–2004 doi:10.1161/hs0901.095600 pmid:11546888

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. White PM,
    3. Lewis SC,
    4. Nahser H, et al

    ; HELPS Trial Collaboration. HydroCoil Endovascular Aneurysm Occlusion and Packing Study (HELPS trial): procedural safety and operator-assessed efficacy results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:217–23 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0936 pmid:18184832

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Molyneux AJ,
    3. Kerr RS,
    4. Yu LM, et al

    ; International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) Collaborative Group. International subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised comparison of effects on survival, dependency, seizures, rebleeding, subgroups, and aneurysm occlusion. Lancet 2005;366:809–17 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67214-5 pmid:16139655

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    2. Im SH,
    3. Han MH,
    4. Kwon BJ, et al

    . Aseptic meningitis after embolization of cerebral aneurysms using hydrogel-coated coils: report of three cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:511–12 pmid:17353325

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    2. Meyers PM,
    3. Lavine SD,
    4. Fitzsimmons BF, et al

    . Chemical meningitis after cerebral aneurysm treatment using two second-generation aneurysm coils: report of two cases. Neurosurgery 2004;55:1222 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000140987.71791.DF pmid:15791738

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    2. Turner RD,
    3. Byrne JV,
    4. Kelly ME, et al

    . Delayed visual deficits and monocular blindness after endovascular treatment of large and giant paraophthalmic aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2008;63:469–74; discussion 474–75 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000324730.37144.4B pmid:18812958

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    2. Xu DS,
    3. Hurley MC,
    4. Batjer HH, et al

    . Delayed cranial nerve palsy after coiling of carotid cavernous sinus aneurysms: case report. Neurosurgery 2010;66:E1215–16 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000369194.13994.62 pmid:20495397

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
28. 28.↵
    2. Byrne JV,
    3. Sohn MJ,
    4. Molyneux AJ, et al

    . Five-year experience in using coil embolization for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: outcomes and incidence of late rebleeding. J Neurosurg 1999;90:656–63 doi:10.3171/jns.1999.90.4.0656 pmid:10193610

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    2. Cognard C,
    3. Weill A,
    4. Castaings L, et al

    . Intracranial berry aneurysms: angiographic and clinical results after endovascular treatment. Radiology 1998;206:499–510 doi:10.1148/radiology.206.2.9457205 pmid:9457205

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    2. Adams WM,
    3. Laitt RD

    . Aneurysm remnants. Neurointerventionist 2000;1:74–83
31. 31.↵
    2. Kotowski M,
    3. Naggara O,
    4. Darsaut TE, et al

    . Safety and occlusion rates of surgical treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature from 1990 to 2011. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2013;84:42–48 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2011-302068 pmid:23012447

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    2. Darsaut TE,
    3. Jack AS,
    4. Kerr RS, et al

    . International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial-ISAT, part II: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:156 doi:10.1186/1745-6215-14-156 pmid:23714335

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    2. Darsaut TE,
    3. Raymond J

    . The design of the STenting in Aneurysm Treatments (STAT) trial. J Neurointerv Surg 2012;4:178–81 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2011-010065 pmid:21990519

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    2. Raymond J,
    3. Darsaut TE,
    4. Guilbert F, et al

    . Flow diversion in aneurysms trial: the design of the FIAT study. Interv Neuroradiol 2011;17:147–53 pmid:21696651 pmid:21696651

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    2. Turk AS 3rd.,
    3. Martin RH,
    4. Fiorella D, et al

    . Flow diversion versus traditional endovascular coiling therapy: design of the prospective LARGE aneurysm randomized trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1341–45 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3968 pmid:24831596

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    2. Gory B,
    3. Bonafé A,
    4. Pierot L, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of flow-diverter stents in endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysm: interest of the prospective DIVERSION observational study. J Neuroradiol 2014;41:93–96 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2013.12.003 pmid:24698743

    CrossRefPubMed