Comparison of Pipeline Embolization Device Sizing Based on Conventional 2D Measurements and Virtual Simulation Using the Sim&Size Software: An Agreement Study

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Turjman F,
   3. Acevedo G,
   4. Moll T, et al

   . Treatment of experimental carotid aneurysms by endoprosthesis implantation: preliminary report. Neurol Res 1993;15:181–84 doi:10.1080/01616412.1993.11740132 pmid:8103584

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   2. Geremia G,
   3. Haklin M,
   4. Brennecke L

   . Embolization of experimentally created aneurysms with intravascular stent devices. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1994;15:1223–31 pmid:7976930

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   2. Fiorella D,
   3. Kelly ME,
   4. Albuquerque FC, et al

   . Curative reconstruction of a giant midbasilar trunk aneurysm with the Pipeline embolization device. Neurosurgery 2009;64:212–17; discussion 217 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000337576.98984.E4 pmid:19057425

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   2. Fiorella D,
   3. Lylyk P,
   4. Szikora I, et al

   . Curative cerebrovascular reconstruction with the Pipeline embolization device: the emergence of definitive endovascular therapy for intracranial aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg 2009;1:56–65 doi:10.1136/jnis.2009.000083 pmid:21994109

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   2. Lylyk P,
   3. Miranda C,
   4. Ceratto R, et al

   . Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience. Neurosurgery 2009;64:632–42; discussion 642–43; quiz N6 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000339109.98070.65 pmid:19349825

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   ADMINISTRATION U.S. FOOD AND DRUG. Premarket Approval (PMA). 2011; https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfpma/pma.cfm?ID=P100018. Accessed August 8, 2018.
7. 7.↵
   2. Patel PD,
   3. Chalouhi N,
   4. Atallah E, et al

   . Off-label uses of the Pipeline embolization device: a review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E4 doi:10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS1742 pmid:28565978

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Dabus G,
   3. Grossberg JA,
   4. Cawley CM, et al

   . Treatment of complex anterior cerebral artery aneurysms with Pipeline flow diversion: mid-term results. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:147–51 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012519 pmid:27382125

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Fischer S,
   3. Perez MA,
   4. Kurre W, et al

   . Pipeline embolization device for the treatment of intra- and extracranial fusiform and dissecting aneurysms: initial experience and long-term follow-up. Neurosurgery 2014;75:364–74; discussion 374 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000431 pmid:24871140

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. Kulcsar Z,
    3. Wetzel SG,
    4. Augsburger L, et al

    . Effect of flow diversion treatment on very small ruptured aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2010;67:789–93 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000372920.39101.55 pmid:20657324

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    2. Phillips TJ,
    3. Wenderoth JD,
    4. Phatouros CC, et al

    . Safety of the Pipeline embolization device in treatment of posterior circulation aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1225–31 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3166 pmid:22678845

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    2. Zhang Y,
    3. Huang QH,
    4. Fang Y, et al

    . A novel flow diverter (Tubridge) for the treatment of recurrent aneurysms: a single-center experience. Korean J Radiol 2017;18:852–59 doi:10.3348/kjr.2017.18.5.852 pmid:28860903

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Rajah G,
    3. Narayanan S,
    4. Rangel-Castilla L

    . Update on flow diverters for the endovascular management of cerebral aneurysms. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E2 doi:10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS16427 pmid:28565980

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Shapiro M,
    3. Raz E,
    4. Becske T, et al

    . Building multidevice Pipeline constructs of favorable metal coverage: a practical guide. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1556–61 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3902 pmid:24676003

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Shapiro M,
    3. Raz E,
    4. Becske T, et al

    . Variable porosity of the Pipeline embolization device in straight and curved vessels: a guide for optimal deployment strategy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:727–33 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3742 pmid:24072622

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Brinjikji W,
    3. Murad MH,
    4. Lanzino G, et al

    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:442–47 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.678151 pmid:23321438

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    Sim&Cure RdlV, 34790 Grabels, France. https://sim-and-cure.com/product. Accessed August, 29, 2018.
18. 18.↵
    2. Kulcsár Z,
    3. Ernemann U,
    4. Wetzel SG, et al

    . High-profile flow diverter (Silk) implantation in the basilar artery: efficacy in the treatment of aneurysms and the role of the perforators. Stroke 2010;41:1690–96 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.580308 pmid:20616327

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. van Rooij WJ,
    3. Sluzewski M

    . Perforator infarction after placement of a Pipeline flow-diverting stent for an unruptured A1 aneurysm. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:E43–44 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2034 pmid:20150311

    FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    2. Potts MB,
    3. Shapiro M,
    4. Zumofen DW, et al

    . Parent vessel occlusion after Pipeline embolization of cerebral aneurysms of the anterior circulation. J Neurosurg 2017;127:1333–41 doi:10.3171/2016.9.JNS152638 pmid:28059658

    CrossRefPubMed
21. 21.↵
    2. Raz E,
    3. Shapiro M,
    4. Becske T, et al

    . Anterior choroidal artery patency and clinical follow-up after coverage with the Pipeline embolization device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:937–42 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4217 pmid:28059658

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Makoyeva A,
    3. Bing F,
    4. Darsaut TE, et al

    . The varying porosity of braided self-expanding stents and flow diverters: an experimental study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:596–602 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3234 pmid:22878007

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Mut F,
    3. Cebral JR

    . Effects of flow-diverting device oversizing on hemodynamics alteration in cerebral aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:2010–16 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3080 pmid:22555581

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    2. Zhou G,
    3. Su M,
    4. Yin YL, et al

    . Complications associated with the use of flow-diverting devices for cerebral aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Focus 2017;42:E17 doi:10.3171/2017.3.FOCUS16450 pmid:28565981

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Bernardini A,
    3. Larrabide I,
    4. Petrini L, et al

    . Deployment of self-expandable stents in aneurysmatic cerebral vessels: comparison of different computational approaches for interventional planning. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2012;15:303–11 doi:10.1080/10255842.2010.527838 pmid:21491256

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Kim JH,
    3. Kang TJ,
    4. Yu WR

    . Mechanical modeling of self-expandable stent fabricated using braiding technology. J Biomech 2008;41:3202–12 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.08.005 pmid:18804764

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Ma D,
    3. Dargush GF,
    4. Natarajan SK, et al

    . Computer modeling of deployment and mechanical expansion of neurovascular flow diverter in patient-specific intracranial aneurysms. J Biomech 2012;45:2256–63 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.06.013 pmid:22818662

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Ma D,
    3. Dumont TM,
    4. Kosukegawa H, et al

    . High-fidelity virtual stenting (HiFiVS) for intracranial aneurysm flow diversion: in vitro and in silico. Ann Biomed Eng 2013;41:2143–56 doi:10.1007/s10439-013-0808-4 pmid:23604850

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Bouillot P,
    3. Brina O,
    4. Yilmaz H, et al

    . Virtual-versus-real implantation of flow diverters: clinical potential and influence of vascular geometry. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:2079–86 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4845 pmid:27365325

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Fernandez H,
    3. Macho JM,
    4. Blasco J, et al

    . Computation of the change in length of a braided device when deployed in realistic vessel models. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 2015;10:1659–65 doi:10.1007/s11548-015-1230-1 pmid:26062795

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Narata AP,
    3. Blasco J,
    4. Roman LS, et al

    . Early results in flow diverter sizing by computational simulation: quantification of size change and simulation error assessment. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 2018;15:557–66 doi:10.1093/ons/opx288 pmid:29351652

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    2. Martinez-Galdamez M,
    3. Holtmannspöetter M,
    4. Isokangas M, et al

    . Simulation in clinical practice: first experience with Sim&Size before implantation of flow diverter (Pipeline) or WEB-device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. In: Proceedings of the Anatomy Biology Clinical Correlations-Working group in Interventional Neuroradiology Seminar, Val d'Isère, France. January 15–20, 2017
33. 33.↵
    2. Nelson PK,
    3. Lylyk P,
    4. Szikora I, et al

    . The Pipeline embolization device for the intracranial treatment of aneurysms trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:34–40 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2421 pmid:21148256

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    2. Becske T,
    3. Kallmes DF,
    4. Saatci I, et al

    . Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology 2013;267:858–68 doi:10.1148/radiol.13120099 pmid:23418004

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
35. 35.
    2. Shapiro M,
    3. Becske T,
    4. Riina HA, et al

    . Toward an endovascular internal carotid artery classification system. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:230–36 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3666 pmid:23928138

    Abstract/FREE Full Text