First multicenter study evaluating the utility of the BENCHMARKTM BMXTM 81 large-bore access catheter in neurovascular interventions.

INTRODUCTION: This study is the first multicentric report on the safety, efficacy, and technical performance of utilizing a large bore (0.081″ inner diameter) access catheter in neurovascular interventions. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from seven sites in the United States for neurovascular procedures via large bore 0.081″ inner diameter access catheter (Benchmark BMX81, Penumbra, Inc.). The primary outcome was technical success, defined as the access catheter reaching its target vessel. Safety outcomes included periprocedural device-related and access site complications. RESULTS: There were 90 consecutive patients included. The median age of the patients was 63 years (IQR: 53, 68); 53% were female. The most common interventions were aneurysm embolization (33.3%), carotid stenting (12.2%), and arteriovenous malformation embolization (11.1%). The transradial approach was most used (56.7%), followed by transfemoral (41.1%). Challenging anatomic variations included severe vessel tortuosity (8/90, 8.9%), type 2 aortic arch (7/90, 7.8%), type 3 aortic arch (2/90, 2.2%), bovine arch (2/90, 2.2%), and severe angle (<30°) between the subclavian artery and target vessel (1/90, 1.1%). Technical success was achieved in 98.9% of the cases (89/90), with six cases requiring a switch from radial to femoral (6.7%) and one case from femoral to radial (1.1%). There were no access site complications or complications related to the 0.081″ catheter. Two postprocedural complications occurred (2.2%), unrelated to the access catheter. CONCLUSION: The BMX™ 81 large-bore access catheters was safe and effective in both radial and femoral access across a wide range of neurovascular procedures, achieving high technical success without any access site or device-related complications.

Evaluating the Readability of Online Patient Education Materials for Trigeminal Neuralgia.

BACKGROUND: Patients, including patients with chronic pain conditions, increasingly turn to the Internet for health information. To facilitate comprehension, this information ought to be written at or below the 8th grade reading level, which is the average American adult's reading level. This study measured the reading level of popular online sources for trigeminal neuralgia. METHODS: The top 10 search results for the search term "trigeminal neuralgia" were selected for inclusion. Flesch Reading Ease, Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, Gunning Fog Index, Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, Coleman-Liau Index, Automated Readability Index, and Linsear Write Formula were used to assess readability. One-way analysis of variance was used to test for statistical differences in average readability scores among the different web pages. RESULTS: Across the web pages, the average readability scores were as follows: Flesch Reading Ease, 42.1 ± 7.7; Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, 10.9 ± 0.9; Gunning Fog Index, 15 ± 1.5; Simple Measure of Gobbledygook, 10.9 ± 1.2; Coleman-Liau Index, 12.1 ± 1.3; Automated Readability Index, 11.9 ± 1.4; Linsear Write Formula, 12.4 ± 1.7. Results from one-way analysis of variance demonstrated no statistically significant difference in overall readability scores (F12,78 = 0.008; P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The writing of popular online education materials for trigeminal neuralgia is likely too complex for the average American adult to comprehend. This material should be revised to be readable at or below the 8th grade reading level. A variety of easily readable online education materials for trigeminal neuralgia can assist patients in understanding their illness and potentially improve patient decision making and outcomes.