Comparative Efficacy of Flow Diverter Devices in the Treatment of Carotid Sidewall Intracranial Aneurysms: a Retrospective, Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: The comparative efficacy and safety of first-generation flow diverters (FDs), Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) (Medtronic, Irvine, California), Silk (Balt Extrusion, Montmorency, France), Flow Re-direction Endoluminal Device (FRED) (Microvention, Tustin, California), and Surpass Streamline (Stryker Neurovascular, Fremont, California), is not directly established and largely inferred. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different FDs in treating sidewall ICA intracranial aneurysms. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from eighteen academic institutions from 2009-2016, comprising 444 patients treated with one of four devices for sidewall ICA aneurysms. Data on demographics, aneurysm characteristics, treatment outcomes, and complications were analyzed. Angiographic and clinical outcomes were assessed using various imaging modalities and modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Propensity score weighting was employed to balance confounding variables. The data analysis used Kaplan-Meier curves, logistic regression, and Cox proportional-hazards regression. RESULTS: While there were no significant differences in retreatment rates, functional outcomes (mRS 0-1), and thromboembolic complications between the four devices, the probability of achieving adequate occlusion at the last follow-up was highest in Surpass device (HR: 4.59; CI: 2.75-7.66, p < 0.001), followed by FRED (HR: 2.23; CI: 1.44-3.46, p < 0.001), PED (HR: 1.72; CI: 1.10-2.70, p = 0.018), and Silk (HR: 1.0 ref. standard). The only hemorrhagic complications were with Surpass (1%). CONCLUSION: All the first-generation devices achieved good clinical outcomes and retreatment rates in treating ICA sidewall aneurysms. Prospective studies are needed to explore the nuanced differences between these devices in the long term.

Practical uses of the BENCHMARK™ BMX®81 in the road less travelled: Guide catheter comparison for radial access in neurovascular intervention.

BACKGROUND: Radial arterial access has gained interest for neurovascular procedures in recent years. Although there are no randomized control trials for neurointervention procedures using radial access, there is growing literature demonstrating its feasibility and favorable outcomes. Equipment technical improvements, like the recently introduced BENCHMARK™ BMX®81 System, have made radial navigation safer, with improved maneuverability and support for a variety of procedures. We present a multicenter case series highlighting our institutional radial access experience comparing the BMX®81 with alternative catheters. METHODS: Multicenter retrospective cohort study of 80 patients who underwent neurovascular procedures through a radial approach. In half of the cases a BENCHMARK™ BMX®81 System was used. The comparison group consisted of the BENCHMARK™071 and 96, Neuron MAX®088 and BALLAST™ systems. Procedures included endovascular thrombectomy, carotid and brachiocephalic artery stenting, middle meningeal artery embolization, flow diverter stenting, vertebral artery sacrifice, aneurysm coiling, and WEB™ device deployment. RESULTS: In our series, the BMX®81 was successful in the navigation of the anatomy to the target location in 95% of cases. No radial access or BMX®81 related complications were identified. There was no significant difference in fluoroscopy time between the BMX81 and the comparison group. Four patients in the comparison group had catheter-related complications due to vasospasm. Eighty-six percent of BMX®81 cases had satisfactory outcomes and no technical difficulties. The remainder presented technical difficulties, but none of these were considered secondary to the puncture site or support structure. CONCLUSIONS: The BENCHMARK™ BMX®81 System is a recently developed guiding catheter which has design and size features supporting radial access for a variety of neurovascular interventions. Early multicenter experience highlights the ease of use and versatility of this new catheter as an alternative to transfemoral access as well as other catheters used for radial access.

neuroGPT-X: toward a clinic-ready large language model.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the performance of a context-enriched large language model (LLM) compared with international neurosurgical experts on questions related to the management of vestibular schwannoma. Furthermore, another objective was to develop a chat-based platform incorporating in-text citations, references, and memory to enable accurate, relevant, and reliable information in real time. METHODS: The analysis involved 1) creating a data set through web scraping, 2) developing a chat-based platform called neuroGPT-X, 3) enlisting 8 expert neurosurgeons across international centers to independently create questions (n = 1) and to answer (n = 4) and evaluate responses (n = 3) while blinded, and 4) analyzing the evaluation results on the management of vestibular schwannoma. In the blinded phase, all answers were assessed for accuracy, coherence, relevance, thoroughness, speed, and overall rating. All experts were unblinded and provided their thoughts on the utility and limitations of the tool. In the unblinded phase, all neurosurgeons provided answers to a Likert scale survey and long-answer questions regarding the clinical utility, likelihood of use, and limitations of the tool. The tool was then evaluated on the basis of a set of 103 consensus statements on vestibular schwannoma care from the 8th Quadrennial International Conference on Vestibular Schwannoma. RESULTS: Responses from the naive and context-enriched Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) models were consistently rated not significantly different in terms of accuracy, coherence, relevance, thoroughness, and overall performance, and they were often rated significantly higher than expert responses. Both the naive and content-enriched GPT models provided faster responses to the standardized question set than expert neurosurgeon respondents (p < 0.01). The context-enriched GPT model agreed with 98 of the 103 (95%) consensus statements. Of interest, all expert surgeons expressed concerns about the reliability of GPT in accurately addressing the nuances and controversies surrounding the management of vestibular schwannoma. Furthermore, the authors developed neuroGPT-X, a chat-based platform designed to provide point-of-care clinical support and mitigate the limitations of human memory. neuroGPT-X incorporates features such as in-text citations and references to enable accurate, relevant, and reliable information in real time. CONCLUSIONS: The present study, with its subspecialist-level performance in generating written responses to complex neurosurgical problems for which evidence-based consensus for management is lacking, suggests that context-enriched LLMs show promise as a point-of-care medical resource. The authors anticipate that this work will be a springboard for expansion into more medical specialties, incorporating evidence-based clinical information and developing expert-level dialogue surrounding LLMs in healthcare.

Contrast-Induced Encephalopathy and the Blood-Brain Barrier.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-induced encephalopathy (CIE) is an adverse event associated with diagnostic and therapeutic endovascular procedures. Decades of animal and human research support a mechanistic role for pathological blood-brain barrier dysfunction (BBBd). Here, we describe an institutional case series and review the literature supporting a mechanistic role for BBBd in CIE. METHODS: A literature review was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane databases from inception to January 31, 2022. We searched our institutional neurovascular database for cases of CIE following endovascular treatment of cerebrovascular disease during a 6-month period. Informed consent was obtained in all cases. RESULTS: Review of the literature revealed risk factors for BBBd and CIE, including microvascular disease, pathological neuroinflammation, severe procedural hypertension, iodinated contrast load and altered cerebral blood flow dynamics. In our institutional series, 6 of 52 (11.5%) of patients undergoing therapeutic neuroendovascular procedures developed CIE during the study period. Four patients were treated for ischemic stroke and two patients for recurrent cerebral aneurysms. Mechanical stenting or thrombectomy were utilized in all cases. CONCLUSION: In this institutional case series and literature review of animal and human data, we identified numerous shared risk factors for CIE and BBBd, including microvascular disease, increased procedure length, large contrast volumes, severe intraoperative hypertension and use of mechanical devices that may induce iatrogenic endothelial injury.