[1]范锋,管生,郭新宾,等.Pipeline栓塞装置治疗颅内复杂动脉瘤临床观察[J].介入放射学杂志,2020,29(01):15-20.
　FAN Feng,GUAN Sheng,GUO Xinbin,et al.The treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms with Pipeline embolization device: clinical observation[J].journal interventional radiology,2020,29(01):15-20.
点击复制

Pipeline栓塞装置治疗颅内复杂动脉瘤临床观察()

PDF下载中关闭

分享到：

《介入放射学杂志》[ISSN:1008-794X/CN:31-1796/R]

卷:
29
期数:
2020年01
页码:
15-20
栏目:
神经介入
出版日期:
2020-02-10

文章信息/Info

Title:
The treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms with Pipeline embolization device: clinical observation
作者:
范锋; 管生; 郭新宾; 徐浩文; 袁永杰; 陈振; 魏莹
Author(s):
FAN Feng;  GUAN Sheng;  GUO Xinbin;  XU Haowen;  YUAN Yongjie;  CHEN Zhen;  WEI Ying.
Department of Interventional Neurology, First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, Henan Province 450052, China
关键词:
【关键词】　Pipeline栓塞装置; 颅内复杂动脉瘤; 血流导向
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
【摘要】　目的?探讨Pipeline栓塞装置（PED）辅助加圈与不加圈治疗颅内复杂动脉瘤的安全性和有效性。方法?回顾性总结2015年4月至2018年3月郑州大学第一附属医院采用PED治疗的35例（36枚）颅内复杂动脉瘤患者临床资料。其中男11例，女24例；年龄22～73岁，平均（53.6±12.6）岁。动脉瘤位于颈内动脉33枚，大脑中动脉1枚，椎动脉2枚；破裂动脉瘤1枚，未破裂35枚；动脉瘤呈囊性30枚，梭形4枚，夹层2枚；动脉瘤为小型4枚，中型21枚，大型8枚，巨大型3枚。对手术方式、并发症和影像学结果进行分析。 结果?PED加圈组15枚，单纯PED组21枚。两组患者手术成功率为100%。共植入PED 40枚，支架开放不良5枚（PED加圈组4枚，PED组1枚）。发生围手术期轻微缺血事件4例（PED加圈组1例，PED组3例），均为轻微脑梗死，未遗留神经功能缺失；PED加圈组
1例术中发生导丝操作相关出血性并发症，遗留轻度神经功能障碍；两组均无致死性并发症。出院时改良Rankin 量表（mRS）评分0分33例，1分1例，3分1例。23例（65.7%）获影像学随访，中位随访6个月（3～24个月），PED加圈组、PED组动脉瘤完全闭塞分别为9例（90%，9/10）、9例（69.2%，9/13），瘤颈残留分别为1例（10%，1/10）、3例（23.1%，3/13）；PED组1例与术后即刻造影无明显变化（7.7%，1/13）。结论?PED加圈治疗颅内复杂动脉瘤安全有效，可促进瘤囊内血栓形成，可能减少延迟性术后动脉瘤破裂风险，在提高复杂动脉瘤完全闭塞率的同时，并不增加手术操作复杂程度和风险。

参考文献/References:

1 Nelson PK, Lylyk P, Szikora I, et al. The Pipeline embolization device for the intracranial treatment of aneurysms trialJ. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2011, 32: 34-40.
2 Becske T, Potts MB, Shapiro M, et al. Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: 3-year follow-up resultsJ. J Neurosurg, 2017, 127: 81-88.
3 Becske T, Brinjikji W, Potts MB, et al. Long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes following Pipeline embolization device treatment of complex internal carotid artery aneurysms: five-year results of the pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms trialJ. Neurosurgery, 2017, 80: 40-48.
4 Adeeb N, Griessenauer CJ, Foreman PM, et al. Comparison of stent-assisted coil embolization and the Pipeline embolization device for endovascular treatment of ophthalmic segment aneurysms: a multicenter cohort studyJ. World Neurosurg, 2017, 105: 206-212.
5 Lin N, Brouillard AM, Xiang JP, et al. Endovascular management of adjacent tandem intracranial aneurysms: utilization of stent-assisted coiling and flow diversionJ. Acta Neurochir （Wien）, 2015, 157: 379-387.
6 de Barros Faria M, Castro RN, Lundquist J, et al. The role of the Pipeline embolization device for the treatment of dissecting intracranial aneurysmsJ. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2011, 32: 2192-2195.
7 Daou B, Starke RM, Chalouhi N, et al. Pipeline embolization device in the treatment of recurrent previously stented cerebral aneurysmsJ. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2016, 37: 849-855.
8 Zhu D, Yan Y, Zhao P, et al. Safety and efficacy of flow diverter treatment for blood blister-like aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysisJ. World Neurosurg, 2018, 118: e79-e86.
9 Linzey JR, Griauzde J, Guan Z, et al. Stent-assisted coiling of cerebrovascular aneurysms: experience at a large tertiary care center with a focus on predictors of recurrenceJ. J Neurointerv Surg, 2017, 9: 1081-1085.
10 Nossek E, Chalif DJ, Chakraborty S, et al. Concurrent use of the Pipeline embolization device and coils for intracranial aneurysms: technique, safety, and efficacyJ. J Neurosurg, 2015, 122: 904-911.
11 Bender MT, Jiang B, Campos JK, et al. Single-stage flow diversion with adjunctive coiling for cerebral aneurysm: outcomes and technical considerations in 72 casesJ. J Neurointerv Surg, 2018, 10: 843-850.
12 Sweid A, Atallah E, Herial N, et al. Pipeline-assisted coiling versus pipeline in flow diversion treatment of intracranial aneurysmsJ. J Clin Neurosci, 2018, 58: 20-24.
13 Jin D, Sheng J, Yang X, et al. Matrix metalloproteinases andtissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases expression in human cerebral ruptured and unruptured aneurysmJ. Surg Neurol, 2007, 68（Suppl 2）: S11-S16.
14 Tulamo R, Frosen J, Hernesniemi J, et al. Inflammatory changes in the aneurysm wall: a reviewJ. J Neurointerv Surg, 2010, 2: 120-130.
15 Thielen E, McClure M, Rouchaud A, et al. Concomitant coiling reduces metalloproteinase levels in flow diverter- treated aneurysms but anti- inflammatory treatment has no effectJ. J Neurointerv Surg, 2017, 9: 307-310.
16 Shobayashi Y, Tateshima S, Kakizaki R, et al. Intra-aneurysmal hemodynamic alterations by a self-expandable intracranial stent and flow diversion stent: high intra-aneurysmal pressure remains regardless of flow velocity reductionJ. J Neurointerv Surg, 2013, 5（Suppl 3）: iii38-iii42.
17 Siddiqui AH, Kan P, Abla AA, et al. Complications after treatment with pipeline embolization for giant distal intracranial aneurysms with or without coil embolizationJ. Neurosurgery, 2012, 71: e509-e513.
18 Park M, Kilburg C, Taussky P, et al. Pipeline embolization device with or without adjunctive coil embolization: analysis of complications from the IntrePED registryJ. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol, 2016，37: 1127–1131.
19 Qassim AM, Guan s, Saidi H, et al. Effectiveness of MRA on embolized intracranial aneurysms: a comparison of DSA,CE-MRA, and TOF-MRAJ. J Intervent Med, 2018, 1: 32-41.

相似文献/References:

[1]刘 涛,那世杰,庄 宗,等.Pipeline栓塞装置治疗海绵窦段和眼动脉段动脉瘤初步随访分析[J].介入放射学杂志,2018,27(12):1127.
　LIU Tao,NA Shijie,ZHUANG Zong,et al.The application of Pipeline embolization device in treating intracranial aneurysms located between cavernous sinus segment and ophthalmic artery segment[J].journal interventional radiology,2018,27(01):1127.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
（收稿日期：2018-12-07）
（本文编辑：边佶）
更新日期/Last Update: 2020-02-08