Flow Diversion for ICA Aneurysms with Compressive Neuro-Ophthalmologic Symptoms: Predictors of Morbidity, Mortality, and Incomplete Aneurysm Occlusion

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Micieli JA,
   2. Newman NJ,
   3. Barrow DL, et al

   . Intracranial aneurysms of neuro-ophthalmologic relevance. J Neuroophthalmol 2017;37:421–39 doi:10.1097/WNO.0000000000000515 pmid:28665866

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Szikora I,
   2. Marosfoi M,
   3. Salomváry B, et al

   . Resolution of mass effect and compression symptoms following endoluminal flow diversion for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:935–39 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3547 pmid:23493889

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Binyamin TR,
   2. Dahlin BC,
   3. Waldau B

   . Resolution of third nerve palsy despite persistent aneurysmal mass effect after flow diversion embolization of posterior communicating artery aneurysms. J Clin Neurosci 2016;31:207–09 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2016.02.027 pmid:27183957

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Sahlein DH,
   2. Fouladvand M,
   3. Becske T, et al

   . Neuroophthalmological outcomes associated with use of the Pipeline Embolization Device: analysis of the PUFS trial results. J Neurosurg 2015;123:897–905 doi:10.3171/2014.12.JNS141777 pmid:26162031

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Silva MA,
   2. See AP,
   3. Dasenbrock HH, et al

   . Vision outcomes in patients with paraclinoid aneurysms treated with clipping, coiling, or flow diversion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E15 doi:10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS1718 pmid:28565983

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Silva MA,
   2. See AP,
   3. Khandelwal P, et al

   . Comparison of flow diversion with clipping and coiling for the treatment of paraclinoid aneurysms in 115 patients. J Neurosurg 2019;130:1505–12 doi:10.3171/2018.1.JNS171774 pmid:29932380

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Boulouis G,
   2. Soize S,
   3. Maus V, et al

   ; Compressive Aneurysm Study Group. Flow diversion for internal carotid artery aneurysms with compressive neuro-ophthalmologic symptoms: clinical and anatomical results in an international multicenter study. J Neurointerv Surg 2021 Nov 18. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018188 pmid:34795018

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Raymond J,
   2. Guilbert F,
   3. Weill A, et al

   . Long-term angiographic recurrences after selective endovascular treatment of aneurysms with detachable coils. Stroke 2003;34:1398–1403 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000073841.88563.E9 pmid:12775880

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Gawlitza M,
   2. Soize S,
   3. Manceau P-F, et al

   . Delayed intra-aneurysmal migration of a flow diverter construct after treatment of a giant aneurysm of the cavernous internal carotid artery. J Neuroradiol 2020;47:233–36 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2019.01.092 pmid:30659891

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Becske T,
    2. Kallmes DF,
    3. Saatci I, et al

    . Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology 2013;267:858–68 doi:10.1148/radiol.13120099 pmid:23418004

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Kallmes DF,
    2. Hanel R,
    3. Lopes D, et al

    . International retrospective study of the Pipeline Embolization Device: a multicenter aneurysm treatment study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:108–115 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4111 pmid:25355814

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Brinjikji W,
    2. Kallmes DF,
    3. Cloft HJ, et al

    . Age-related outcomes following intracranial aneurysm treatment with the Pipeline Embolization Device: a subgroup analysis of the IntrePED registry. J Neurosurg 2016;124:1726–30 doi:10.3171/2015.5.JNS15327 pmid:26544776

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Bechan RS,
    2. Majoie CB,
    3. Sprengers ME, et al

    . Therapeutic internal carotid artery occlusion for large and giant aneurysms: a single center cohort of 146 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:125–29 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4487 pmid:26294643

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Labeyrie MA,
    2. Lenck S,
    3. Bresson D, et al

    . Parent artery occlusion in large, giant, or fusiform aneurysms of the carotid siphon: clinical and imaging results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:140–45 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4064 pmid:25082818

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Gaberel T,
    2. Borha A,
    3. di Palma C, et al

    . Clipping versus coiling in the management of posterior communicating artery aneurysms with third nerve palsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 2016;87:498–506.e4 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2015.09.026 pmid:26409080

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Chien SC,
    2. Chen CC,
    3. Chen CT, et al

    . Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in stent-assisted coil embolization of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Interv Neuroradiol 2021 Nov 18. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1177/15910199211054959 pmid:34792425

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Moore JM,
    2. Adeeb N,
    3. Shallwani H, et al

    . A multicenter cohort comparison study of the safety, efficacy, and cost of ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel in aneurysm flow diverter procedures. Neurosurgery 2017;81:665–71 doi:10.1093/neuros/nyx079 pmid:28475757

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Park KY,
    2. Ozaki T,
    3. Kostynskyy A, et al

    . Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in the dual antiplatelet regimen for intracranial stenting or flow-diverter treatment for unruptured cerebral aneurysms: a single-center cohort study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2021;42:1638–44 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7216 pmid:34244132

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Soize S,
    2. Foussier C,
    3. Manceau P-F, et al

    . Comparison of two preventive dual antiplatelet regimens for unruptured intracranial aneurysm embolization with flow diverter/disrupter: a matched-cohort study comparing clopidogrel with ticagrelor. J Neuroradiol 2019;46:378–83 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2019.01.094 pmid:30731144

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Zhang Q,
    2. Shao Q,
    3. Chang K, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of coils in conjunction with the Pipeline Flex Embolization Device for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms. Front Neurol 2021;12:651465 doi:10.3389/fneur.2021.651465 pmid:34759878

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    1. Lin N,
    2. Brouillard AM,
    3. Krishna C, et al

    . Use of coils in conjunction with the Pipeline Embolization Device for treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2015;76:142–49 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000579 pmid:25255261

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Sweid A,
    2. Atallah E,
    3. Herial N, et al

    . Pipeline-assisted coiling versus Pipeline in flow diversion treatment of intracranial aneurysms. J Clin Neurosci 2018;58:20–24 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2018.10.081 pmid:30454690

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Szikora I,
    2. Turányi E,
    3. Marosfoi M

    . Evolution of flow-diverter endothelialization and thrombus organization in giant fusiform aneurysms after flow diversion: a histopathologic study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1716–20 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4336 pmid:26251428

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Becske T,
    2. Brinjikji W,
    3. Potts MB, et al

    . Long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes following Pipeline Embolization Device treatment of complex internal carotid artery aneurysms: five-year results of the Pipeline for Uncoilable or Failed Aneurysms trial. Neurosurgery 2017;80:40–48 doi:10.1093/neuros/nyw014 pmid:28362885

    CrossRefPubMed