Safety and efficacy of the Pipeline Flex embolization device with Shield Technology for the acute treatment of ruptured internal carotid artery pseudoaneurysms: a multi-institution case series.

OBJECTIVE: Ruptured blister, dissecting, and iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms are rare pathologies that pose significant challenges from a treatment standpoint. Endovascular treatment via flow diversion represents an increasingly popular option; however, drawbacks include the requirement for dual antiplatelet therapy and the potential for thromboembolic complications, particularly acute complications in the ruptured setting. The Pipeline Flex embolization device with Shield Technology (PED-Shield) offers reduced material thrombogenicity, which may aid in the treatment of ruptured internal carotid artery pseudoaneurysms. METHODS: The authors conducted a multi-institution, retrospective case series to determine the safety and efficacy of PED-Shield for the treatment of ruptured blister, dissecting, and iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms of the internal carotid artery. Clinical, radiographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were included in the final analysis. Seventeen underwent placement of a single device, and 16 underwent placement of two devices. No thromboembolic complications occurred. Four patients were maintained on aspirin alone, and all others were treated with long-term dual antiplatelet therapy. Among patients with 3-month follow-up, 93.8% had a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2. Complete occlusion at follow-up was observed in 82.6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: PED-Shield represents a new option for the treatment of ruptured blister, dissecting, and iatrogenic pseudoaneurysms of the internal carotid artery. The reduced material thrombogenicity appeared to improve the safety of the PED-Shield device, as this series demonstrated no thromboembolic complications even among patients treated with only single antiplatelet therapy. The efficacy of PED-Shield reported in this series, particularly with placement of two devices, demonstrates its potential as a first-line treatment option for these pathologies.

Repeat thrombectomy after large vessel re-occlusion: a propensity score matched analysis of technical and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) remains the standard of care for acute large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke. However, the safety and efficacy of repeat thrombectomy (rEVT) in recurrent LVO remains unclear. This study uses a large real-world patient cohort to study technical and clinical outcomes after rEVT. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study including patients who underwent thrombectomy between January 2013 and December 2022. Data were included from 21 comprehensive stroke centers globally through the Stroke Thrombectomy and Aneurysm Registry (STAR). Patients undergoing single EVT or rEVT within 30 days of LVO stroke were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to compare patients undergoing single EVT versus rEVT. RESULTS: Out of a total of 7387 patients who underwent thrombectomy for LVO stroke, 90 (1.2%) patients underwent rEVT for the same vascular territory within 30 days. The median (IQR) time to re-occlusion was 2 (1-7) days. Compared with a matched cohort of patients undergoing a single EVT procedure, patients undergoing rEVT had a comparable rate of good functional outcome and mortality rate, but a higher rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). There was a significant reduction in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of patients who underwent rEVT at discharge compared with baseline (-4.8±11.4; P=0.006). The rate of successful recanalization was similar in the single thrombectomy and rEVT groups (78% vs 80%, P=0.171) and between index and rEVT performed on the same patient (79% vs 80%; P=0.593). CONCLUSION: Short-interval rEVT is associated with an improvement in the NIHSS score following large vessel re-occlusion. Compared with single thrombectomy, there was a higher rate of sICH with rEVT, but without a significant impact on rates of functional independence or mortality.

Spinal tumor embolization: benefit for surgical resection.

The embolization of hypervascular spinal tumors preoperatively has shown to be a worthwhile adjunctive procedure to minimize the elevated risks associated with surgical resection, such as intraoperative blood loss and its associated complications. Resection of these hypervascular tumors is necessary for local tumor control, reduction in patient-reported pain, improved neurological functioning, and spinal stability. This adjunctive procedure has been associated with improved surgical outcomes and easier facilitation of surgical resection. As such, we provide a review of the current literature examining the employment of this technique. Specifically, this article (a) reviews the techniques of embolization, with anatomical considerations of the arterial framework of the spinal network; (b) relativizes and outlines the post-embolization management of spinal tumor resection; (c) provides a critical outlook on the reported benefit of preoperative embolization before surgical resection with support from clinical studies in the literature; and (d) discusses the efficacy and reliability of provocative testing and post-procedural management and follow-up. Ultimately, a thorough and updated review of preoperative spinal tumor embolization and its clinical benefits will summarize the current fund of knowledge and encourage future research toward continued improvements in patient outcomes for those needing to undergo surgical resection of spinal lesions.