Persistent Blood Flow inside the Woven EndoBridge Device More Than 6 Months after Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment: Frequency, Mechanisms, and Management—A Retrospective Single-Center Study

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Gawlitza M,
   2. Soize S,
   3. Manceau PF, et al

   . An update on intrasaccular flow disruption for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Expert Rev Med Devices 2019;16:229–36 doi:10.1080/17434440.2019.1584035 pmid:30775934

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Pierot L,
   2. Moret J,
   3. Barreau X, et al

   . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB in the cumulative population of three prospective, multicenter series. J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:553–59 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013448 pmid:28965106

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   1. Arthur AS,
   2. Molyneux A,
   3. Coon AL, et al

   ; WEB-IT Study Investigators. The safety and effectiveness of the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) system for the treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms: final 12-month results of the pivotal WEB Intrasaccular Therapy (WEB-IT) Study. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:924–30 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014815 pmid:30992395

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Lubicz B,
   2. Klisch J,
   3. Gauvrit JY, et al

   . WEB-DL endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: short- and midterm results in a European Study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:432–38 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3869 pmid:24457823

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Liebig T,
   2. Kabbasch C,
   3. Strasilla C, et al

   . Intrasaccular flow disruption in acutely ruptured aneurysms: a multicenter retrospective review of the use of the WEB. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1721–27 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4347 pmid:26138139

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. van Rooij SB,
   2. van Rooij WJ,
   3. Peluso JP, et al

   . WEB treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a single-center cohort of 100 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:2282–87 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5371 pmid:28882858

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Klisch J,
   2. Sychra V,
   3. Strasilla C, et al

   . The Woven EndoBridge Cerebral Aneurysm Embolization Device (WEB II): initial clinical experience. Neuroradiology 2011;53:599–607 doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0891-x pmid:21617885

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Pierot L,
   2. Klisch J,
   3. Liebig T, et al

   . WEB-DL endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: long-term results in a European series. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:2314–19 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4445 pmid:26228882

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Pierot L,
   2. Spelle L,
   3. Molyneux A, et al

   ; WEBCAST and French Observatory Investigators. Clinical and anatomical follow-up in patients with aneurysms treated with the WEB device: 1-year follow-up report in the cumulated population of 2 prospective, multicenter series (WEBCAST and French Observatory). Neurosurgery 2016;78:133–41 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001106 pmid:26552042

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Moret J,
    3. Turjman F, et al

    . WEB treatment of intracranial aneurysms: feasibility, complications, and 1-month safety results with the WEB DL and WEB SL/SLS in the French Observatory. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:922–27 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4230 pmid:25655876

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Moret J,
    3. Turjman F, et al

    . WEB treatment of intracranial aneurysms: clinical and anatomic results in the French Observatory. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:655–59 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4578 pmid:26514608

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Molyneux A,
    3. Byrne J

    . O-020 WEB® aneurysm treatment: preliminary results of WEBCAST 2 study. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8(Suppl 1):A13–14
13. 13.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Costalat V,
    3. Moret J, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB: results of the WEBCAST study. J Neurosurg 2016;124:1250–56 doi:10.3171/2015.2.JNS142634 pmid:26381253

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Gubucz I,
    3. Buhk J, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with the WEB: results of the WEBCAST 2 study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1151–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5178 pmid:28450432

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    1. Cognard C,
    2. Januel AC

    . Remnants and recurrences after the use of the WEB intrasaccular device in large-neck bifurcation aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2015;76:522–30 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000669 pmid:25710103

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Herbreteau D,
    2. Bibi R,
    3. Narata AP, et al

    . Are anatomic results influenced by WEB shape modification? Analysis in a prospective, single-center series of 39 patients with aneurysms treated with the WEB. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:2280–86 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4918 pmid:27538903

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Moret J,
    3. Barreau X et al

    . Aneurysm treatment with Woven EndoBridge in the cumulative population of three prospective, multicenter series: 2-year follow-up. Neurosurgery 2020 Jan 20. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.1093/neuros/nyz557 pmid:31960052

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Soize S,
    2. Gawlitza M,
    3. Raoult H, et al

    . Imaging follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated by endovascular means. Stroke 2016;47:1407–12 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011414 pmid:27026629

    FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Timsit C,
    2. Soize S,
    3. Benaissa A, et al

    . Contrast-enhanced and time-of-flight MRA at 3T compared with DSA for the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with the WEB device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:1684–89 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4791 pmid:27102311

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Nawka MT,
    2. Sedlacik J,
    3. Frölich A, et al

    . Multiparametric MRI of intracranial aneurysms treated with the Woven EndoBridge (WEB): a case of Faraday’s cage? J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:988–94 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013625 pmid:29440326

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Chueh JY,
    2. Vedantham S,
    3. Wakhloo AK, et al

    . Aneurysm permeability following coil embolization: packing density and coil distribution. J NeurontervSurg 2015;7:676–81 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011289 pmid:25031179

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Cognard C,
    3. Anxionnat R, et al

    ; for the CLARITY Investigators. Ruptured intracranial aneurysms: factors affecting the rate and outcome of endovascular treatment complications in a series of 782 patients (CLARITY study). Radiology 2010;256:916–23 doi:10.1148/radiol.10092209 pmid:20720074

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. Johnston SC,
    2. Dowd CF,
    3. Higashida RT, et al

    ; CARAT Investigators. Predictors of rehemorrhage after treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Stroke 2008;39:120–25 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.495747 pmid:18048860

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Bannery C,
    3. Batchinsky-Parrou V, et al

    . Clipping of recanalized intracerebral aneurysms initially treated by the Woven EndoBridge device. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:807–11 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014903 pmid:31088942

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    1. Durner G,
    2. Özpeynirci Y,
    3. Schmitz B, et al

    . Clipping as re-treatment strategy after treatment of a cerebral aneurysm with the Woven EndoBridge embolization device: case report. J Neurosurg 2018 Mar 1. [Epub ahead of print] doi:10.3171/2017.10.JNS171528 pmid:29570011

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Pierot L

    . Letter: WEB aneurysm treatment: occlusion stability and “compression.” Neurosurgery 2015;77:E666–67 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000880 pmid:26132284

    CrossRefPubMed