Zilver stent versus Carotid Wallstent for endovascular treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension

被引:6
|
作者
Bilgin, Cem [1 ,7 ]
Oliver, Alexander A. [2 ]
Cutsforth-Gregory, Jeremy K. [3 ]
Chen, John J. [4 ]
Rammos, Stylianos K. [5 ]
Cloft, Harry J. [1 ]
Lanzino, Giuseppe [6 ]
Kallmes, David F. [1 ]
Brinjikji, Waleed [1 ]
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Radiol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[2] Mayo Clin Minnesota, Biomed Engn, Rochester, MN USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Neurol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[4] Mayo Clin, Ophthalmol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
[5] Arkansas Neurosci Inst, Neurosurg, Little Rock, AR USA
[6] Mayo Clin Minnesota, Neurosurg, Rochester, MN USA
[7] Mayo Clin, Dept Radiol, Rochester, MN 55905 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Intracranial Pressure; Stenosis; Stent; SINUS; PRESSURE; STENOSIS;
D O I
10.1136/jnis-2022-019659
中图分类号
R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
100207 ;
摘要
BackgroundVenous sinus stenting (VSS) is a promising treatment option for medically refractory idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH). There are no published studies comparing the performance of different types of stents employed in VSS procedures. In this study we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy outcomes of the Zilver 518 (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana, USA) and the Carotid Wallstent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts, USA) devices. MethodsRecords of patients with IIH who underwent VSS between January 2015 and February 2022 at a single referral center were retrospectively reviewed. Patients treated with the Zilver stent or Carotid Wallstent were included in the study. Stent model and size data, pre- and post-treatment pressure gradients, technical and safety outcomes, and pre- and post- stenting papilledema, headache, and tinnitus severity were collected. The chi(2) and Fisher-Freeman-Halton tests were used for categorical data and the Student's t-test and Mann-Whitney U test were employed to examine the differences in non-categorical variables. ResultsA total of 81 procedures (28 (34.5%) with the Zilver stent and 53 (65.5%) with the Carotid Wallstent) were performed in 76 patients. The mean procedure time was significantly shorter with the Zilver stent (22.56 +/- 10.2 vs 33.9 +/- 15 min, p=0.001). The papilledema improvement and resolution rates did not significantly differ between groups (94.7% vs 94.5%, p>0.99 for improvement; 78.9% vs 67.5%, p=0.37 for resolution). The tinnitus improvement and resolution rates in the Zilver stent group were significantly higher than those of the Carotid Wallstent group (100% vs 78.9%, p=0.041; 90% vs 63.1%, p=0.03, respectively). Additionally, the Zilver stent provided a significantly higher rate of headache resolution and improvement than the Carotid Wallstent (84.6% vs 27.6%, p=0.001 for resolution; 92.3% vs 72.3%, p=0.043 for improvement). One patient from the Carotid Wallstent group underwent re-stenting due to in-stent stenosis and refractory papilledema. No significant in-stent stenosis was observed in the Zilver stent group. ConclusionStent choice may affect VSS outcomes. The Zilver stent provided better clinical outcomes than the Carotid Wallstent, with significantly shorter procedure times. Larger studies are needed to determine the efficacy of available venous stents for IIH.
引用
收藏
页码:1269 / +
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Update on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
    Bidot, Samuel
    Bruce, Beau B.
    SEMINARS IN NEUROLOGY, 2015, 35 (05) : 527 - 538
  • [42] Novel Approaches to the Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
    Subramanian, Prem S.
    CURRENT NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSCIENCE REPORTS, 2024, 24 (08) : 265 - 272
  • [43] Bariatric surgery for the treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension
    Fridley, Jared
    Foroozan, Rod
    Sherman, Vadim
    Brandt, Mary L.
    Yoshor, Daniel
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2011, 114 (01) : 34 - 39
  • [44] Treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension with bariatric surgery
    Perez-Sanchez, J. R.
    Arnoriaga Rodriguez, M.
    Diaz-Otero, F.
    Breton Lesmes, I.
    NEUROLOGIA, 2019, 34 (07): : 493 - 495
  • [45] CURRENT DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF IDIOPATHIC INTRACRANIAL HYPERTENSION
    Salomvary, Bernadett
    Panczel, Gyula
    Markia, Balazs
    Nagy, Gabor
    IDEGGYOGYASZATI SZEMLE-CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2017, 70 (9-10): : 321 - 332
  • [46] Update on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
    Ahmad, Sarah R.
    Moss, Heather E.
    SEMINARS IN NEUROLOGY, 2019, 39 (06) : 682 - 691
  • [47] Digoxin as a Treatment for Patients With Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension
    Haagensen, Jen
    Hoegerl, Carl
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN OSTEOPATHIC ASSOCIATION, 2014, 114 (03): : 213 - 215
  • [48] Idiopathic intracranial hypertension: Diagnosis, monitoring and treatment
    Biousse, V.
    REVUE NEUROLOGIQUE, 2012, 168 (10) : 673 - 683
  • [49] Treatment of idiopathic intracranial hypertension: Is there a place for octreotide?
    Deftereos, Spyros N.
    Panagopoulos, Gregory
    Georgonikou, Dimitra
    Karageorgiou, Clementine E.
    Karageorgiou, Elissaios
    Piadites, George
    CEPHALALGIA, 2011, 31 (16) : 1679 - 1680
  • [50] Idiopathic intracranial hypertension: Outcome with nonsurgical treatment
    Strassman, IB
    Skarf, B
    INVESTIGATIVE OPHTHALMOLOGY & VISUAL SCIENCE, 1996, 37 (03) : 3257 - 3257