RESUMO
PURPOSE: Pulsatile tinnitus can be caused by a high-riding jugular bulb (HRJB), characterized by the superior position of the jugular bulb in the petrous temporal bone. The anatomical position and morphology of this entity make it challenging for endovascular treatment. We report our experience with two patients successfully treated with a stent-assisted Woven EndoBridge (WEB; Microvention, Tustin, CA, USA) device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe two cases of HRJB in patients presenting with disabling pulsatile tinnitus. Temporary balloon occlusion of the jugular bulb prior to the intervention reduced tinnitus intensity. Both patients were subsequently treated under general anesthesia with the WEB device deployed in the HRJB which was held by a stent deployed in the sigmoid sinus. RESULTS: Both procedures were successful with good positioning of the WEB device and no procedural complications. Both patients had complete resolution of pulsatile tinnitus immediately after the procedure. Follow-up imaging showed successful occlusion of the venous cavity with a widely patent stent. CONCLUSION: Among patients with pulsatile tinnitus caused by an ipsilateral HRJB, a stent-assisted WEB device seems to be a viable endovascular option with angiographic and clinical success.
RESUMO
The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) is an intra-aneurysmal flow disruptor designed for the treatment of broad-based arterial aneurysms with a high safety and effectiveness profile.1, 2 It does not require concomitant antiplatelet therapy compared to other devices such as flow diverters or intracranial stents. Innominate artery pseudoaneurysms are a rare consequence of blunt traumatic injury, infection, or atherosclerotic disease.3, 4 We describe the case of an innominate artery pseudoaneurysm successfully treated with a WEB SL device instead of stenting, therefore alleviating the need for dual antiplatelet therapy. The treatment was successful and uneventful and postprocedural computed tomography angiography confirmed the complete occlusion of the pseudoaneurysm.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Parent vessel occlusion (PVO) is a time-honored treatment for unclippable or uncoilable intracranial aneurysms. Flow diversion (FD) is a recent endovascular alternative that can occlude the aneurysm and spare the parent blood vessel. Our aim was to compare outcomes of FD with endovascular PVO. METHODS: This is a prespecified treatment subgroup analysis of the Flow diversion in Intracranial Aneurysms trial (FIAT). FIAT was an investigator-led parallel-group all-inclusive pragmatic randomized trial. For each patient, clinicians had to prespecify an alternative management option to FD before stratified randomization. We report all patients for whom PVO was selected as the best alternative treatment to FD. The primary outcome was a composite of core-lab determined angiographic occlusion or near-occlusion at 3-12 months combined with an independent clinical outcome (mRS<3). Primary analyses were intent-to-treat. There was no blinding. RESULTS: There were 45 patients (16.2% of the 278 FIAT patients randomized between 2011 and 2020 in 3 centers): 22 were randomly allocated to FD and 23 to PVO. Aneurysms were mainly large or giant (mean 22 mm) anterior circulation (mainly carotid) aneurysms. A poor primary outcome was reached in 11/22 FD (50.0%) compared to 9/23 PVO patients (39.1%) (RR: 1.28, 95% CI [0.66-2.47]; P = 0.466). Morbidity (mRS >2) at 1 year occurred in 4/22 FD and 6/23 PVO patients. Angiographic results and serious adverse events were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The comparison between PVO and FD was inconclusive. More randomized trials are needed to better determine the role of FD in large aneurysms eligible for PVO.