Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background And Purpose: Flow disruption achieved by braided intrasaccular implants is a novel treatment strategy for cerebrovascular aneurysms. We hypothesized that the degree of intra-aneurysmal flow disruption can be quantified in vitro and is influenced by device position across the aneurysm neck. We tested this hypothesis using the Medina® Embolization Device (MED).
Methods: Ten different patient-specific elastic vascular models were manufactured. Models were connected to a pulsatile flow circuit, filled with a blood-mimicking fluid and treated by two operators using a single MED. Intra-aneurysmal flow velocity was measured using conventional and high-frequency digital subtraction angiography (HF-DSA) before and after each deployment. Aneurysm neck coverage by the implanted devices was assessed with flat detector computed tomography on a three-point Likert scale.
Results: A total of 80 individual MED deployments were performed by the two operators. The mean intra-aneurysmal flow velocity reduction after MED implantation was 33.6% (27.5-39.7%). No significant differences in neck coverage (p = 0.99) or flow disruption (p = 0.84) were observed between operators. The degree of flow disruption significantly correlated with neck coverage (ρ = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.21-0.59, p = 0.002) as well as with neck area (ρ = -0,35, 95% CI: -0.54 --0.13, p = 0.024). On multiple regression analysis, both neck coverage and total neck area were independent predictors of flow disruption.
Conclusions: The degree of intra-aneurysmal flow disruption after MED implantation can be quantified in vitro and varies considerably between different aneurysms and different device configurations. Optimal device coverage across the aneurysm neck improves flow disruption and may thus contribute to aneurysm occlusion.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5800678 | PMC |
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0191975 | PLOS |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!