Risk factors and management of intraprocedural rupture during coil embolization of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: role of balloon guiding catheter

IntroductionIntraprocedural rupture (IPR) is a serious complication of endovascular coil embolization of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). Although outcomes after IPR are poor, methods to prevent subsequent neurological deterioration have not yet been investigated. We evaluated the risk factors and management strategies for IPR, particularly the role of balloon guiding catheters (BGCs) in rapid hemostasis.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed all UIA cases treated with coil embolization at three institutions between 2003 and 2021, focusing on preoperative radiological data, operative details, and outcomes.ResultsIn total, 2,172 aneurysms were treated in 2026 patients. Of these, 19 aneurysms in 19 patients (0.8%) ruptured during the procedure. Multivariate analysis revealed that aneurysms with a bleb (OR: 3.03, 95% CI: 1.21 to 7.57, p = 0.017), small neck size (OR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.85, p = 0.007), and aneurysms in the posterior communicating artery (PcomA) (OR: 4.92, 95% CI: 1.19 to 20.18, p = 0.027) and anterior communicating artery (AcomA) (OR: 12.08, 95% CI: 2.99 to 48.79, p < 0.001) compared with the internal carotid artery without PcomA were significantly associated with IPR. The incidence of IPR was similar between the non-BGC and BGC groups (0.9% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.822); however, leveraging BGC was significantly associated with lower morbidity and mortality rates after IPR (0% vs. 44%, p = 0.033).DiscussionThe incidence of IPR was relatively low. A bleb, small aneurysm neck, and location on PcomA and AcomA are independent risk factors for IPR. The use of BGC may prevent fatal clinical deterioration and achieve better clinical outcomes in patients with IPR

Proposed predictors of the need for retreatment after coil embolization of unruptured cerebral aneurysms with major or minor recanalization: Analysis of a single center’s experience

Objective: Various risk factors for recanalization after coil embolization have been reported, but the indications for retreatment of recanalized aneurysms have not been determined.The aim of this study was to identify risk factors indicating the need for retreating recanalization during long-term follow-up (approximately 1 year). Methods: A total of 172 unruptured saccular aneurysms in 155 patients treated by initial coil embolization between February 2012 and July 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Intraluminal thrombosed aneurysms, aneurysms treated with stent assistance, and aneurysms followed without digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were excluded. Recanalization was identified in 31 aneurysms. Recanalized aneurysms (Meyer grade ≥2) were defined as major recanalization (MA); those that worsened to Meyer grade 1 were defined as minor recanalization (MI). Age, sex, aneurysm location, shape, five morphological variables (neck, height, width, dome-to-neck ratio, aspect ratio), aneurysm volume, endovascular technique, immediate Meyer grade, and volume embolization ratio (VER) were compared between MI (n = 18) and MA (n = 13). Predictors of MA were determined using logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses. Results: On multivariate logistic regression analysis, spherical shape (odds ratio (OR) 11.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.28–111) and VER (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.13–3.28) were independent predictors of MA. On ROC curve analysis, the optimal cut-off value for the VER was 20.8% (sensitivity, 76.9%; specificity, 77.8%). Conclusions: Lower VER and non-spherical shape appear to be independent risk factors for progression to MA in recanalized aneurysms, and packing with a VER >20.8% is expected to prevent progression to MA