Outcome Study of the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield Technology in Unruptured Aneurysms (PEDSU)

Atasoy D., Kandasamy N., Hart J., Lynch J., Yang S. -. , Walsh D., ...More

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, vol.40, no.12, pp.2094-2101, 2019 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 40 Issue: 12
  • Publication Date: 2019
  • Doi Number: 10.3174/ajnr.a6314
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.2094-2101
  • Karadeniz Technical University Affiliated: Yes


BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The recently introduced Pipeline Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology (Pipeline Shield) is the third generation of Pipeline flow-diverter devices. It has a new stent-surface modification, which reduces thrombogenicity. We aimed to evaluate clinical and radiographic (safety and efficacy) outcomes of the Pipeline Shield. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 30-day and 1-year mortality and morbidity rates and the 6- and 18-month radiographic aneurysm occlusion outcomes for procedures performed between March 2016 and January 2018 were analyzed. 3D-TOF-MRA was used for follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-four attempted Pipeline Shield procedures were performed for 41 patients with 44 target aneurysms (total of 52 aneurysms treated). A total of 88.5% of devices were inserted in the anterior circulation, and 11.5%, in the posterior circulation; 49/52 (94.2%) aneurysms were saccular; and 1/52 (1.9%) was fusiform. One (1.9%) aneurysm was an iatrogenic pseudoaneurysm, and 1 (1.9%) was a dissecting aneurysm. Seventy-one percent (35/49) of the saccular aneurysms were wide-neck (neck, >4?mm), 34.6% (18/52) were large (?10?mm), and 3.8% (2/52) were giant (?25?mm). The mean aneurysm sac maximal diameter was 9.0?mm, and the mean neck width was 5.0?mm. The cumulative mortality and morbidity rates were 2.3% and 6.8% at 1?year, respectively. The adequate occlusion rate was 78.8% at 6?months and 90.3% at 18?months. CONCLUSIONS: In this pragmatic and non-industry-sponsored study, the occlusion rates and safety outcomes were similar to those seen in previously published studies with flow-diverter devices and earlier generation Pipeline Embolization Devices.