Loading…

Comparative study of covered stent with coil embolization in the treatment of cranial internal carotid artery aneurysm: a nonrandomized prospective trial

To evaluate whether Willis covered stent implantation yielded angiographic and clinical results were better than those with coil embolization. Eighty-nine patients with cranial internal carotid artery (CICA) aneurysms were treated nonrandomly with covered stents ( n = 43, group A) or coil embolizati...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European radiology 2010-11, Vol.20 (11), p.2732-2739
Main Authors: Li, Ming-Hua, Leng, Bing, Li, Yong-Dong, Tan, Hua-Qiao, Wang, Wu, Song, Dong-Lei, Tian, Yan-Long
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate whether Willis covered stent implantation yielded angiographic and clinical results were better than those with coil embolization. Eighty-nine patients with cranial internal carotid artery (CICA) aneurysms were treated nonrandomly with covered stents ( n = 43, group A) or coil embolization ( n = 46, group B). Data on the technical success, procedure time, initial and final angiographic results, and final clinical outcomes were collected and analyzed at >6 months post-procedure. Covered stent placement and coil embolization were successful in all patients, except for one patient in group A. The initial angiographic results showed complete occlusion in 34 group-A patients (80.9%; 95% CI: 69%, 93%) and 24 group-B patients (52.2%; 95% CI: 37%, 67%) ( P = 0.004). The final angiographic results indicated complete occlusion in 39 group A patients (39/41, 95.1%; 95% CI: 88%, 102%) and 22 group B patients (48.9%; 95% CI: 34%, 64%) ( P < 0.001). The average procedure time was shorter in group A than that in group B ( P < 0.001). CICA aneurysm treatment with covered stents yielded better intermediate-term angiographic outcome than those with the recommended approach of coil embolization. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01029938)
ISSN:0938-7994
1432-1084
DOI:10.1007/s00330-010-1854-z