Safety and Efficacy of Aneurysm Treatment with the WEB: Results of the WEBCAST 2 Study

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Cognard C,
   3. Pierot L,
   4. Anxionnat R, et al

   ; Clarity Study Group. Results of embolization used as the first treatment choice in a consecutive nonselected population of ruptured aneurysms: clinical results of the Clarity GDC study. Neurosurgery 2011;69:837–41; discussion 842 doi:10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182257b30 pmid:21623247

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Spelle L,
   4. Vitry F

   . ATENA: the first prospective, multicentric evaluation of the endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. J Neuroradiol 2008;35:67–70. Erratum in J Neuroradiol 2008;35:252 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2008.02.006 pmid:18466978

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Cognard C,
   4. Spelle L, et al

   . Safety and efficacy of balloon remodeling technique during endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: critical review of the literature. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:12–15 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2403 pmid:21349960

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Spelle L,
   4. Leclerc X, et al

   . Endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: comparison of safety of remodeling technique and standard treatment with coils. Radiology 2009;251:846–55 doi:10.1148/radiol.2513081056 pmid:19318586

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Cognard C,
   4. Anxionnat R, et al

   ; CLARITY Investigators. Remodeling technique for endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms had a higher rate of adequate postoperative occlusion than did conventional coil embolization with comparable safety. Radiology 2011;258:546–53 doi:10.1148/radiol.10100894 pmid:21131582

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   2. Shapiro M,
   3. Becske T,
   4. Sahlein , et al

   . Stent-supported aneurysm coiling: a literature survey of treatment and follow-up. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:159–63 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2719 pmid:22033717

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Berge J,
   3. Biondi A,
   4. Machi P, et al

   . Flow-diverter Silk stent for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: 1-year follow-up in a multicenter study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1150–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2907 pmid:22300924

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Wakhloo AK

   . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: current status. Stroke 2013;44:2046–54 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.000733 pmid:23798560

   FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Liebig T,
   4. Sychra V, et al

   . Intrasaccular flow-disruption treatment of intracranial aneurysms: preliminary results of a multicenter clinical study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1232–38 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3191 pmid:22678844

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Klisch J,
    4. Cognard C, et al

    . Endovascular WEB flow disruption in middle cerebral artery aneurysms: preliminary feasibility, clinical, and anatomical results in a multicenter study. Neurosurgery 2013;73:27–34; discussion 34–35 doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000429860.04276.c1 pmid:23615104

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Papagiannaki C,
    3. Spelle L,
    4. Januel AC, et al

    . WEB intrasaccular flow disruptor—prospective, multicenter experience in 83 patients with 85 aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:2006–11 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4028 pmid:24994823

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Lubicz B,
    3. Klisch J,
    4. Gauvrit JY, et al.

    WEB-DL endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: short- and midterm results in a European study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:432–38 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3869 pmid:24457823

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Klisch J,
    4. Liebig T, et al

    . WEB-DL endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: long-term results in a European series. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2314–19 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4445 pmid:26228882

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Biondi A,
    4. Narata AP, et al

    . Should indications for WEB aneurysm treatment be enlarged? Report of a series of 20 patients with aneurysms in “atypical” locations for WEB treatment. J Neuroradiol 2017 Mar 2. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2016.12.011 pmid:28262374

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Moret J,
    4. Turjman F, et al

    . WEB treatment of intracranial aneurysms: feasibility, complications, and 1-month safety results with WEB-DL and WEB-SL/SLS in the French Observatory. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:922–27 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4230 pmid:25655876

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Moret J,
    4. Turjman F, et al

    . WEB treatment of intracranial aneurysms: clinical and anatomical results in the French Observatory. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:655–59 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4578 pmid:26514608

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Costalat V,
    4. Moret J, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB: results of WEBCAST study. J Neurosurg 2016;124:1250–56 doi:10.3171/2015.2.JNS142634 pmid:26381253

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Pierot L,
    3. Spelle L,
    4. Molyneux A, et al

    . Clinical and anatomical follow-up in patients with aneurysms treated with WEB device: 1-year follow-up report in the cumulated population of 2 prospective, multicenter series (WEBCAST, French Observatory). Neurosurgery 2016;78:133–41 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001106 pmid:26552042

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    2. Muskens IS,
    3. Senders JT,
    4. Dasenbrock HH, et al

    . The Woven Endobridge device for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review. World Neurosurg 2017;98:809–817.e1 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2016.11.020 pmid:27856383

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Asnafi S,
    3. Rouchaud A,
    4. Pierot L, et al

    . Efficacy and safety of the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:2287–92 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4900 pmid:27516237

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Van Rooij W,
    3. Peluso JP,
    4. Bechan RS, et al

    . WEB treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1679–83 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4811 pmid:27102307

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Herbreteau D,
    3. Bibi R,
    4. Narata AP, et al

    . Are anatomical results influenced by WEB shape modification? Analysis in a prospective, single-center series of 39 patients with aneurysms treated with WEB. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:2280–2286 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4918 pmid:27538903

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    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
24. 24.↵
    2. Cognard C,
    3. Januel AC

    . Remnants and recurrences after the use of the WEB intrasaccular device in large-neck bifurcation aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2015;76:522–30; discussion 530 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000669 pmid:25710103

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Pierot L

    . Letter: WEB aneurysm treatment: stability and “compression.” Neurosurgery 2015;77:E666–67 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000880 pmid:26132284

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Timsit C,
    3. Soize S,
    4. Benaissa A, et al

    . Contrast-enhanced and time-of-flight MRA at 3T compared with DSA for the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with the WEB device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1684–89 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4791 pmid:27102311

    Abstract/FREE Full Text