RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Endovascular Therapy Effectiveness for Unruptured Saccular Intracranial Aneurysms
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.07.12.23292485
DO 10.1101/2023.07.12.23292485
A1 Pineda-Castillo, Sergio A.
A1 Jones, Evan R.
A1 Laurence, Keely A.
A1 Thoendel, Lauren R.
A1 Cabaniss, Tanner L.
A1 Zhao, Yan D.
A1 Bohnstedt, Bradley N.
A1 Lee, Chung-Hao
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/07/13/2023.07.12.23292485.abstract
AB Background Currently, endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms (ICAs) is limited by low complete occlusion rates. The advent of novel endovascular technology has expanded the applicability of endovascular therapy; however, the superiority of novel embolic devices over the traditional Guglielmi detachable coils (GDCs) is still debated. We performed a systematic review of literature that reported the Raymond-Roy occlusion classifications (RROC) rates of modern endovascular devices to determine their immediate and long-term occlusion effectiveness for the treatment of unruptured saccular ICAs.Methods A search was conducted using electronic databases (PUBMED, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science). We retrieved studies published between 2000-2022 reporting immediate and long-term RROC rates of subjects treated with different endovascular ICA therapies. We extracted demographic information of the treated patients and their reported angiographic RROC rates.Results A total of 80 studies from 15 countries were included for data extraction. RROC rates determined from angiogram were obtained for 21,331 patients (72.5% females, pooled mean age: 58.2 (95% CI: 56.8-59.6), harboring 22,791 aneurysms. The most frequent aneurysm locations were the internal carotid artery (46.4%, 95% CI: 41.9%-50.9%), the anterior communicating artery (26.4%, 95% CI: 22.5%-30.8%), the middle cerebral artery (24.5%, 95% CI:19.2%-30.8%) and the basilar tip (14.4%, 95% CI:11.3%-18.3%). The RROC rates were analyzed for GDCs, the Woven EndoBridge (WEB), and flow diverters. The immediate complete occlusion (RROC-I) rate was the highest in balloon-assisted coiling (73.9%, 95% CI: 65.0%-81.2%) and the lowest in the WEB (27.8%, 95% CI:13.2%-49.2%). The long-term complete occlusion probability was homogenous in all analyzed devices.Conclusions We observed that the coil-based endovascular therapy provides acceptable rates of complete occlusion, where the balloon-assisted coils provide greater probability of immediate complete occlusion. Out of the analyzed devices, the WEB exhibited the shortest time to achieve >90% probability of long-term complete occlusion (∼18 months). Overall, the GDCs remain the gold standard for endovascular treatment of unruptured saccular aneurysms.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementWe acknowledge funding support from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant R01 HL159475, OCAST Health Research Program (HR-18-002), and the OSCTR Pilot Grant Program. S.A.P.-C was supported in part by the University of Oklahoma Graduate College Alumni Fellowship.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesThe data will be made available upon request.