Flow diversion is typically reserved for large, giant, or morphologically complex aneurysms. Coiling remains a first-line treatment for small, morphologically simple aneurysms.
To compare coiling and flow diversion in small, uncomplicated intracranial aneurysms (typically amenable to coiling).
Forty patients treated with the pipeline embolization device (PED) for small (<10 mm), morphologically simple aneurysms that would have also been amenable to coiling were identified. These patients were matched in a 1:1 fashion with 40 patients with comparable aneurysms treated with coiling. Matching was based on age, gender, aneurysm size, and aneurysm morphology.
The 2 groups were comparable with regard to baseline characteristics including age, gender, and aneurysm size. The complication rate did not differ between the 2 groups (2.5% with coiling vs 5% with PED; P = .6). Multivariate analysis did not identify any predictor of complications. Complete occlusion (100%) at follow-up was significantly higher in patients treated with PED (70%) than coiling (47.5%, P = .04). In multivariate analysis, treatment with PED predicted aneurysm obliteration ( P = .04). A significantly higher proportion of coiled patients (32.5%) required retreatment compared with flow diversion (5%, P = .003). In multivariate analysis, coiling predicted retreatment ( P = .006). All patients achieved a favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale: 0-2) regardless of group.
This matched analysis suggests that flow diversion provides higher occlusion rates, lower retreatment rates, and no additional morbidity compared with coiling in small, simple aneurysms amenable to both techniques. These results suggest a potential benefit for flow diversion over coiling even in small, uncomplicated aneurysms.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 April 2017.
All research outputs
#22,346,164
of 34,413,214 outputs
Outputs from Neurosurgery
#5,713
of 7,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,078
of 355,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurosurgery
#60
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,413,214 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,044 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
