The efficacy comparison of spring coil embolization under auxiliary technology and stent implantation spring coil embolization in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-6090.2019.04.012
- VernacularTitle:辅助技术及支架植入弹簧圈栓塞治疗颅内动脉瘤的疗效比较
- Author:
Qingtao ZHANG
1
;
Peng CHEN
;
Wei ZHOU
Author Information
1. 重庆大学附属中心医院(重庆市急救医疗中心)神经外科 400014
- Keywords:
Spring coil embolism;
Intracranial aneurysm;
Balloon;
Double microcatheter;
Micro godet;
Stents
- From:
Chinese Journal of Endocrine Surgery
2019;13(4):315-319
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the clinical effect of spring coil embolization under auxiliary technology and stent implantation spring coil embolization in treatment of intracranial aneurysms.Methods The medical records of 102 patients with intracranial aneurysms who were treated by endovascular embolization were retrospectively analyzed.These patients were divided into stent implantation spring coil embolization (n=58) and aux iliary spring coil embolization group(n=44) according to different treatment methods.The therapeutic effect of postoperative aneurysm embolization for patients of the two groups was evaluated.The postoperative hospitalization time,NIHSS score,ADL score and prognosis of patients in the two groups 6 months after treatment were compared.The incidence of complications of patients in the two groups was compared.Results There was no significant difference between the two groups about complete embolization rate,sub-total embolization rate and partial embolization rate after aneurysm surgery(72.73％,20.45％,6.82％ vs 68.97％,25.86％,5.17％)(P＞0.05).The postoperative hospitalization time of patients in the assistive coil embolization group (10.45±2.32) d was significantly less than that in the stent-assisted coil embolization (12.97±2.56) d (P＜0.05),but there was no significant difference in postoperative NIHSS score and ADL score between the two groups [(6.63±3.81),(60.12±9.80) vs (8.35±4.03),(59.63±9.47)(P＞0.05)].The recovery rate of patients in the assistive coil embolization group (68.18％) was significantly higher than that in the stent-assisted coil embolization group (55.17％) (P＜0.05),while the mortality rate (0％) was significantly lower than that in the stent-assisted coil embolization group (6.90％) (P＜0.05).The incidence of complications such as intraoperative cerebral vasospasm,postoperative gastrointestinal bleeding and postoperative cerebral infarction (9.09％,6.82％,4.55％) was significantly lower in the assistive coil embolization group than that in the stent-assisted coil embolization group (25.86％,20.69％,17.24％) (P＜0.05),while there was no significant difference in aneurysm recurrence rate between the two groups (13.64％ vs 10.34％)(P＞0.05).Conclusion Compared with stent implantation spring coil embolization,the spring coil embolization under auxiliary technology can significantly shorten the postoperative hospitalization time,improve the prognosis and reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.
