Initial Experience with the Pipeline Vantage Flow Diverter for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Kallmes DF,
   2. Brinjikji W,
   3. Cekirge S, et al

   . Safety and efficacy of the Pipeline embolization device for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a pooled analysis of 3 large studies. J Neurosurg 2017;127:775–80 doi:10.3171/2016.8.JNS16467 pmid:27791519

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   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
3. 3.↵
   1. Pereira VM,
   2. Kelly M,
   3. Vega P, et al

   . New Pipeline Flex device: initial experience and technical nuances. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:920–25 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011347 pmid:25280568

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Trivelato FP,
   2. Wajnberg E,
   3. Rezende MT, et al

   . Safety and effectiveness of the Pipeline Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: midterm results from a multicenter study. Neurosurgery 2020;87:104–11 doi:10.1093/neuros/nyz356 pmid:31504821

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Booth TC,
   2. Bassiouny A,
   3. Lynch J, et al

   . Outcome study of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device (second version) in unruptured (and ruptured) aneurysms (PEDVU[R] study). J Neurointerv Surg 2024;16:1136–44 doi:10.1136/jnis-2023-020754 pmid:38071557

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. de Villiers L,
   2. Carraro do Nascimento V,
   3. Domitrovic L, et al

   . Vanguard Study: initial experience with the new fourth generation Pipeline Vantage Flow Diverter (PVFD): 6-month results, technical and clinical considerations. J Neurointerv Surg 2024 Jan 3 [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1136/jnis-2023-021182 pmid:38171607

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Döring K,
   2. Aburub A,
   3. Krauss JK, et al

   . Early clinical experience with the new generation Pipeline Vantage flow diverter in the treatment of unruptured saccular aneurysms using short-term dual antiplatelet therapy. Interv Neuroradiol 2023 Oct 5 [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1177/15910199231205047 pmid:37796761

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Sciacca S,
   2. Bassiouny A,
   3. Mansoor N, et al

   . Early outcomes of the Pipeline Vantage flow diverter: a multicentre study. Clin Neuroradiol 2023;33:887–96 doi:10.1007/s00062-023-01314-x pmid:37378843

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Martínez-Galdámez M,
   2. Lamin SM,
   3. Lagios KG, et al

   . Treatment of intracranial aneurysms using the Pipeline Flex embolization device with shield technology: angiographic and safety outcomes at 1-year follow-up. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:396–99 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014204 pmid:30262655

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.↵
    1. Hagen MW,
    2. Girdhar G,
    3. Wainwright J, et al

    . Thrombogenicity of flow diverters in an ex vivo shunt model: effect of phosphorylcholine surface modification. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:1006–11 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012612 pmid:27799376

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Moher D,
    2. Liberati A,
    3. Tetzlaff J, et al

    ; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–69, W64 doi:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 pmid:19622511

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. O’Kelly CJ,
    2. Krings T,
    3. Fiorella D, et al

    . A novel grading scale for the angiographic assessment of intracranial aneurysms treated using flow diverting stents. Interv Neuroradiol 2010;16:133–37 doi:10.1177/159101991001600204 pmid:20642887

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Mascitelli JR,
    2. Moyle H,
    3. Oermann EK, et al

    . An update to the Raymond-Roy Occlusion Classification of intracranial aneurysms treated with coil embolization. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:496–502 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011258 pmid:24898735

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Sterne JA,
    2. Hernán MA,
    3. Reeves BC, et al

    . ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016;355:i4919 doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919 pmid:27733354

    FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Viechtbauer W

    . Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor Package. J Stat Soft 2010;36:1–48 doi:10.18637/jss.v036.i03

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Balduzzi S,
    2. Rücker G,
    3. Schwarzer G

    . How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial. Evid Based Ment Health 2019;22:153–60 doi:10.1136/ebmental-2019-300117 pmid:31563865

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    1. McGuinness LA,
    2. Higgins JPT

    . Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments. Res Synth Methods 2021;12:55–61 doi:10.1002/jrsm.1411 pmid:32336025

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Vollherbst DF,
    2. Cekirge HS,
    3. Saatci I, et al

    . First clinical multicenter experience with the new Pipeline Vantage flow diverter. J Neurointerv Surg 2023;15:63–69 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018480 pmid:35172983

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Martínez-Galdámez M,
    2. Onal Y,
    3. Cohen JE, et al

    . First multicenter experience using the Silk Vista flow diverter in 60 consecutive intracranial aneurysms: technical aspects. J Neurointerv Surg 2021;13:1145–51 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-017421 pmid:33832971

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Lobsien D,
    2. Clajus C,
    3. Behme D, et al

    . Aneurysm treatment in acute SAH with hydrophilic-coated flow diverters under single-antiplatelet therapy: a 3-center experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2021;42:508–15 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6942 pmid:33446495

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Ley D,
    2. Mühl-Benninghaus R,
    3. Yilmaz U, et al

    . The Derivo Embolization Device, a second-generation flow diverter for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms, evaluated in an elastase-induced aneurysm model. Clin Neuroradiol 2017;27:335–43 doi:10.1007/s00062-015-0493-9 pmid:26699192

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Hanel RA,
    2. Cortez GM,
    3. Lopes DK, et al

    . Prospective study on embolization of intracranial aneurysms with the Pipeline Device (PREMIER study): 3-year results with the application of a flow diverter specific occlusion classification. J Neurointerv Surg 2023;15:248–54 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018501 pmid:35292570

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    1. Chia GS,
    2. de Villiers L,
    3. Carraro do Nascimento V, et al

    . Safety and clinical effectiveness of Pipeline Shield Device for intracranial aneurysms in an Australian Cohort (SCOPE‐AUS). Stroke: Vascular and Interfentional Neurology 2022;2:e000292 doi:10.1161/SVIN.121.000292

    CrossRef
24. 24.↵
    1. Lylyk I,
    2. Scrivano E,
    3. Lundquist J, et al

    . Angiographic and clinical outcomes from 396 aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology. Interv Neuroradiol 202415910199241231018 doi:10.1177/15910199241231018 pmid:38689478

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Greco E,
    2. Ghaith AK,
    3. Rios-Zermeno J, et al

    . Long-term safety and efficacy of Pipeline Embolization Device in anterior and posterior circulation aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg 2024;185:103–12 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2024.01.140 pmid:38307200

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Luo C,
    2. Jin L,
    3. Dong J, et al

    . Clinical outcomes of Pipeline Embolization Devices with Shield Technology for treating intracranial aneurysms. Front Neurol 2022;13:971664 doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.971664 pmid:36452166

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Starke RM,
    2. Thompson J,
    3. Pagani A, et al

    . Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology. J Neurointerv Surg 2020;12:981–86 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016043 pmid:32487767

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Lin N,
    2. Brouillard AM,
    3. Keigher KM, et al

    . Utilization of Pipeline embolization device for treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: US multicenter experience. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:808–15 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011320 pmid:25230839

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    1. Foreman PM,
    2. Ilyas A,
    3. Cress MC, et al

    . Ruptured intracranial aneurysms treated with the Pipeline embolization device: a systematic review and pooled analysis of individual patient data. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2021;42:720–25 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7002 pmid:33602746

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Abecassis IJ,
    2. Zeeshan Q,
    3. Ghodke BV, et al

    . Surgical versus endovascular management of ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms: emergent issues and future directions. World Neurosurg 2020;136:17–27 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2019.12.127 pmid:31899398

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Popica DA,
    2. Cortese J,
    3. Oliver AA, et al

    . Flow diverter braid deformation following treatment of cerebral aneurysms: incidence, clinical relevance, and potential risk factors. J Neurointerv Surg 2024 Aug 30 [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1136/jnis-2024-022236 pmid:39214688

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Fiehler J,
    2. Ortega-Gutierrez S,
    3. Anagnostakou V, et al

    . Evaluation of flow diverters for cerebral aneurysm therapy: recommendations for imaging analyses in clinical studies, endorsed by ESMINT, ESNR, OCIN, SILAN, SNIS, and WFITN. J Neurointerv Surg 2024 Jun 2 [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1136/jnis-2023-021404 pmid:38830670

    Abstract/FREE Full Text