Fourth-generation Pipeline ™ Vantage flow diversion: First reported US experience of safety and feasibility

The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA) is the fourth generation of Pipeline flow diverter devices, offering numerous technical improvements. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA). This was a...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Interventional neuroradiology 2024-12, p.15910199241301119
Hauptverfasser: Sweid, Ahmad, Chahine, Ahmad, Hage, Stephanie, Morsi, Rami Z, Thind, Sonam, Karar, Lina, Baskaran, Archit, Carrión-Penagos, Julián, Desai, Harsh, Kothari, Sachin A, Rana, Rohini, Verhagen Metman, Okker, Zakaria, Jehad, Siegler, James E, Awad, Issam, Hurley, Michael C, Prabhakaran, Shyam, Polster, Sean, Kass-Hout, Tareq
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA) is the fourth generation of Pipeline flow diverter devices, offering numerous technical improvements. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of The Pipeline Vantage embolization device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA). This was a single-center retrospective study describing the use of The Pipeline Vantage embolization device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Technical feasibility and safety were assessed in terms of intra and postprocedural complications, as well as neurological morbidity upon follow-up. Both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms were included. We included 12 patients in our study (mean age 62; females:  = 9/12, 75%). Aneurysm morphology varied between saccular (41.6%), fusiform (41.6%), blister (8.3%), and pseudoaneurysm (8.3%). Three cases (25%) involved ruptured aneurysms treated in the acute setting. A transradial access was used in 10 cases (83.3%). There was a 100% success in deployment. Seven cases (58.3%) were treated with adjunct embolization device other than a flow diversion. Eight cases (66.6%) were treated with a single flow diversion, three cases (25%) were treated with two flow diversion, and one case (8.3%) was treated with three flow diversion stents. There were no intraoperative complications. There was one postprocedural complication in a dissecting ruptured PICA aneurysm that was ultimately treated with two flow diversion stents and an intrasaccular device. To our knowledge, this is the first US series assessing the periprocedural safety and feasibility of consecutive patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Vantage device (Medtronic, Irvine, CA).
ISSN:1591-0199
2385-2011
DOI:10.1177/15910199241301119