Flow diversion treatment for giant intracranial serpentine aneurysms

Xin Tong; Zijun He; Mingyang Han; Xin Feng; Chuanzhi Duan; Aihua Liu

doi:10.3389/fnagi.2022.988411

Flow diversion treatment for giant intracranial serpentine aneurysms

Front Aging Neurosci. 2022 Nov 3:14:988411. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.988411. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Xin Tong¹, Zijun He¹, Mingyang Han², Xin Feng^{3

4}, Chuanzhi Duan^{3

4}, Aihua Liu¹

Affiliations

¹ Neurointerventional Center, Beijing Neurosurgical Institute and Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital University, Beijing, China.
² Department of Neurosurgery, The Third Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
³ Neurosurgery Center, Department of Cerebrovascular Surgery, Engineering Technology Research Center of Education Ministry of China on Diagnosis and Treatment of Cerebrovascular Disease, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangdong, China.
⁴ Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory on Brain Function Repair and Regeneration, Guangdong, China.

Abstract

Background: Giant serpentine aneurysms (GSAs) are among the most complex and challenging type of intracranial aneurysms. Surgical clipping, bypass, or endovascular parent artery occlusion has been the main treatment of GSAs in the past. However, studies on flow diversion (FD) are limited. Therefore, we reported our experience with patients with GSAs treated with FD.

Methods: Patients with GSAs treated with FD from 2012 to 2020 in our single center were retrospectively reviewed. Angiographic outcomes were graded according to the O'Kelly-Marotta scale as complete occlusion (D), trace filling (C), entry remnant (B), or aneurysm filling (A). Clinical outcomes were assessed using the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score. We also collected the patients' treatment details and perioperative complications.

Results: Thirteen patients with 14 aneurysms were included, including three in the anterior circulation and 11 in the posterior circulation. Grades B-D were found in 72.7% (8/11) of the GSAs. Good prognosis (mRS score, 0-2) was found in 66.7% (8/12) and 50.0% (6/12) of the patients at the 6-month and latest follow-up, respectively. Parent artery occlusion was found in three cases of GSAs. Five postoperative complications were observed, including two minor complications and three major complications.

Conclusion: Although reconstructive treatment with FD could be considered as one of the treatment strategies for patients with both anterior and posterior circulation GSAs, however, the risk of complications and parent artery occlusion should be considered.

Keywords: angiographic outcome; clinical outcome; complication; flow diversion; giant serpentine aneurysm.