Recurrent intracranial aneurysms present a significant clinical challenge, demanding innovative and effective treatment approaches. The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device has emerged as a promising endovascular solution for managing these intricate cases. This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of the WEB device in treating recurrent intracranial aneurysms.
Methods
We conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science, from inception to June 5, 2023. Eligible studies focused on evaluating WEB device performance and included a minimum of five patients with recurrent intracranial aneurysms. The complete and adequate occlusion rates, neck remnant rates, and periprocedural complication rates were pooled using SATA V.17.
Results
Our analysis included five studies collectively enrolling 73 participants. Participant ages ranged from 52.9 to 65 years, with 64.4% being female. Aneurysms were wide-necked and predominantly located in the middle cerebral artery, basilar artery, and anterior cerebral artery. Previous treatments encompassed coiling, clipping, and the use of WEB devices. Our study found an overall adequate occlusion rate of 0.80 (95% CI 0.71–0.89), a complete occlusion rate of 0.39 (95% CI 0.28–0.50), and a neck remnant rate of 0.38 (95% CI 0.27–0.48). Periprocedural complications were reported at a rate of 0%, although heterogeneity was observed in this data. Notably, evidence of publication bias was identified in the reporting of periprocedural complication rates.
Conclusion
Our findings suggest that the WEB device is associated with favorable outcomes for treating recurrent wide-neck intracranial aneurysms.
NovitzkeJ. The basics of brain aneurysms: a guide for patients. J Vasc Interv Neurol2008; 1: 89–90.
2.
CaranciFBrigantiFCirilloL, et al.Epidemiology and genetics of intracranial aneurysms. Eur J Radiol2013; 82: 1598–1605. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.12.026.
3.
RinkelGJDjibutiMAlgraA, et al.Prevalence and risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review. Stroke1998; 29: 251–256. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.29.1.251.
4.
van GijnJKerrRSRinkelGJ. Subarachnoid haemorrhage. Lancet2007; 369: 306–318. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60153-6.
5.
ZhaoJLinHSummersR, et al.Current treatment strategies for intracranial aneurysms: an overview. Angiology2018; 69: 17–30. DOI: 10.1177/0003319717700503.
6.
Abouei MehriziMAHabibiMAKeykhosraviE, et al.The safety and efficacy of eCLIPs for treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurgery2023; 180: 213–223, DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.10.011.
7.
CampiARamziNMolyneuxAJ, et al.Retreatment of ruptured cerebral aneurysms in patients randomized by coiling or clipping in the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT). Stroke2007; 38: 1538–1544. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.106.466987.
8.
FernsSPSprengersMEvan RooijWJ, et al.Coiling of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review on initial occlusion and reopening and retreatment rates. Stroke2009; 40: e523–529. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.109.553099.
9.
ThorntonJDebrunGMAletichVA, et al.Follow-up angiography of intracranial aneurysms treated with endovascular placement of Guglielmi detachable coils. Neurosurgery2002; 50: 239–249. DOI: 10.1097/00006123-200202000-00003.
10.
HasanDMNadareyshviliAIHoppeAL, et al.Cerebral aneurysm sac growth as the etiology of recurrence after successful coil embolization. Stroke2012; 43: 866–868. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.111.637827.
11.
HabibiMAAmaniHMirjaniMS, et al.Predicting the radiological outcome of cerebral aneurysm treatment with machine learning algorithms; a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Interdisciplinary Neurosurgery2024; 36: 101929, DOI: 10.1016/j.inat.2023.101929.
12.
HabibiMAFakhfouriAMirjaniMS, et al.Prediction of cerebral aneurysm rupture risk by machine learning algorithms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18,670 participants. Neurosurg Rev2024; 47: 34. DOI: 10.1007/s10143-023-02271-2.
13.
CrinnionWBhogalPMakalandaHLD, et al.The Woven Endobridge as a treatment for acutely ruptured aneurysms: a review of the literature. Interv Neuroradiol2021; 27: 602–608. DOI: 10.1177/1591019921991397.
14.
GoyalNHoitDDiNittoJ, et al.How to WEB: a practical review of methodology for the use of the Woven EndoBridge. J Neurointerv Surg2020; 12: 512–520. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-015506.
15.
MooreKAGoyalNArthurAS. The Woven EndoBridge embolization device for the treatment of intracranial wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms. Future Cardiol2021; 17: 953–961. DOI: 10.2217/fca-2020-0173.
16.
MuskensISSendersJTDasenbrockHH, et al.The woven endobridge device for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review. World Neurosurg2017; 98: 809–817. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.11.020.
17.
RajRRautioRPekkolaJ, et al.Treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms using the woven EndoBridge device: a two-center experience. World Neurosurgery2019; 123: e709–e716, DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.12.010.
18.
LubiczBMineBCollignonL, et al.WEB device for endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2013; 34: 1209–1214. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3387.
19.
NaamaniKEChenCJAbbasR, et al.Woven EndoBridge versus stent-assisted coil embolization of cerebral bifurcation aneurysms. J Neurosurg2022; 137: 1786–1793. DOI: 10.3171/2022.3.Jns2217.
20.
PageMJMcKenzieJEBossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ2021; 372: n71. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
21.
OuzzaniMHammadyHFedorowiczZ, et al.Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev2016; 5: 210. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.
22.
CumpstonMLiTPageMJ, et al.Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2019; 10: Ed000142. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.Ed000142.
23.
LeeKSZhangJJYNguyenV, et al.The evolution of intracranial aneurysm treatment techniques and future directions. Neurosurg Rev2022; 45: 1–25. DOI: 10.1007/s10143-021-01543-z.
24.
BrownMAParishJGuandiqueCF, et al.A long-term study of durability and risk factors for aneurysm recurrence after microsurgical clip ligation. J Neurosurg2017; 126: 819–824. DOI: 10.3171/2016.2.Jns152059.
25.
TsutsumiKUekiKMoritaA, et al.Risk of aneurysm recurrence in patients with clipped cerebral aneurysms: results of long-term follow-up angiography. Stroke2001; 32: 1191–1194. DOI: 10.1161/01.str.32.5.1191.
26.
TianZLiuJZhangY, et al.Risk factors of angiographic recurrence after endovascular coil embolization of intracranial saccular aneurysms: a retrospective study using a multicenter database. Front Neurol2020; 11: 1026. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2020.01026.
27.
YuLBFangZJYangXJ, et al.Management of residual and recurrent aneurysms after clipping or coiling: clinical characteristics, treatments, and follow-up outcomes. World Neurosurg2019; 122: e838–e846. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.10.160.
28.
PierotLCostalatVMoretJ, et al.Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB: results of the WEBCAST study. J Neurosurg2016; 124: 1250–1256. DOI: 10.3171/2015.2.Jns142634.
29.
KashkoushAEl-AbtahMESrivatsaS, et al.Comparative effectiveness of stent-assisted coiling and Woven EndoBridge embolization for the treatment of unruptured wide-neck bifurcation intracranial aneurysms. J Neurosurg2023; 138: 1487–1493, DOI: 10.3171/2022.10.JNS221138.
30.
HeckerCBroussalisEPfaffJAR, et al.Comparison of the Contour Neurovascular System and Woven EndoBridge device for treatment of wide-necked cerebral aneurysms at a bifurcation or sidewall. J Neurosurg2023; 139: 563–572, DOI: 10.3171/2022.12.JNS222268.
31.
FortunelAJavedKHollandR, et al.Impact of aneurysm diameter, angulation, and device sizing on complete occlusion rates using the woven endobridge (WEB) device: single center United States experience. Intervent Neuroradiol2023; 29: 260–267. DOI: 10.1177/15910199221084804.
32.
GawlitzaMSoizeSJanuelAC, et al.Treatment of recurrent aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge (WEB): anatomical and clinical results. J Neurointerv Surg2018; 10: 629–633. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013287.
33.
HabibiMAAghaeiFTajabadiZ, et al.The performance of machine learning for prediction of H3K27 M mutation in midline gliomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurgery2023, Online ahead of print, DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.11.061.
34.
KimSTBaekJWJinSC, et al.Coil embolization in patients with recurrent cerebral aneurysms who previously underwent surgical clipping. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2019; 40: 116–121. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5909.
35.
KuttyRKKumarAYamadaY, et al.Management of recurrent aneurysms after endovascular coiling: a fujita experience. Asian J Neurosurg2019; 14: 1151–1156. DOI: 10.4103/ajns.AJNS_105_19.
36.
LeeJKimSTShimYW, et al.Microsurgical treatment for the recurrent cerebral aneurysm initially treated using coil embolization. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg2020; 22: 165–175. DOI: 10.7461/jcen.2020.22.3.165.
37.
ToyotaSKumagaiTGotoT, et al.Clipping of recurrent cerebral aneurysms after coil embolization. Acta Neurochir Suppl2018; 129: 53–59. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-73739-3_8.
38.
WuJTongXLiuQ, et al.Microsurgical ligation for incompletely coiled or recurrent intracranial aneurysms: a 17-year single-center experience. Chin Neurosurg J2019; 5: 7. DOI: 10.1186/s41016-019-0153-z.
39.
ZhengYZhengLSunY, et al.Surgical clipping of previously coiled recurrent intracranial aneurysms: a single-center experience. Front Neurol2021; 12: 680375. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.680375.
40.
ChenKSWilsonTJStetlerWR, et al.Management of recurrent aneurysms following endovascular therapy. J Clin Neurosci2015; 22: 1901–1906, DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2015.04.012.
41.
HabibiMAAlesaeidiSZahediM, et al.The efficacy and safety of rituximab in ANCA-associated vasculitis: a systematic review. Biology2022; 11: 1767.
42.
da Silva JúniorNRTrivelatoFPNakiriGS, et al.Endovascular treatment of residual or recurrent intracranial aneurysms after surgical clipping. J Cerebrovasc Endovasc Neurosurg2021; 23: 221–232. DOI: 10.7461/jcen.2021.E2021.03.001.
43.
GrossBAAlbuquerqueFCMoonK, et al.Endovascular treatment of previously clipped aneurysms: continued evolution of hybrid neurosurgery. J Neurointerv Surg2017; 9: 169–172. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012625.
44.
HokariMKazumaraKNakayamaN, et al.Treatment of recurrent intracranial aneurysms after clipping: a report of 23 cases and a review of the literature. World Neurosurg2016; 92: 434–444. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.05.053.
45.
LiWZhuWSunX, et al.Retreatment with flow diverters and coiling for recurrent aneurysms after initial endovascular treatment: a propensity score-matched comparative analysis. Front Neurol2021; 12: 625652. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.625652.
46.
LiYDLiMHGaoBL, et al.Endovascular treatment of recurrent intracranial aneurysms with re-coiling or covered stents. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry2010; 81: 74–79, DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.2009.171967.
47.
DorferCGruberAStandhardtH, et al.Management of residual and recurrent aneurysms after initial endovascular treatment. NEUROSURGERY2012; 70: 537–554. DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e3182350da5.
48.
AkgulEOnanHBCanY, et al.Flow diversion therapy of remnant and recurrent intracranial aneurysms treated surgically. Turk Neurosurg2023; 33: 601–609. DOI: 10.5137/1019-5149.Jtn.41653-22.2.
49.
LeeITKaoYSLaiYJ, et al.Flow diverter retreatment for intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis of efficacy and feasibility. Interv Neuroradiol2022. Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/15910199221095972.
50.
ParkKYYeonJYKimBM, et al.Efficacy and safety of flow-diverter therapy for recurrent aneurysms after stent-assisted coiling. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2020; 41: 663–668. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6476.
51.
YanYZhuSYaoH, et al.Retreatment with a flow diverter for recurrent blood blister-like aneurysms after embolization: a single-center case series. Front Neurol2022; 13: 1009914. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1009914.
52.
PaybastSHabibiMANaser MoghadasiA. Characteristics and management of multiple sclerosis patients during the Omicron era: is there a concern about the MS course in the face of the new variant of COVID-19?Neurol Sci2023; 44: 659–665. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-022-06447-4.
53.
van RooijSSprengersMEPelusoJP, et al.A systematic review and meta-analysis of Woven EndoBridge single layer for treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Interv Neuroradiol2020; 26: 455–460. DOI: 10.1177/1591019920904421.
54.
MouchtourisNHasanDSamaniegoEA, et al.The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device: feasibility, techniques, and outcomes after FDA approval. J Neurosurg2022; 136: 1266–1272. DOI: 10.3171/2021.5.Jns21889.
55.
ShafieeHRiahipourFHormatiA, et al.Comparison of the sedative effect of Ketamine, Magnesium Sulfate, and Propofol in patients undergoing Upper Gastrointestinal endoscopy: double-Blinded randomized clinical trial. CNS Neurol Disord - Drug Targets2023; 22: 1259–1266, DOI: 10.2174/1871527321666220831093652.
56.
KabbaschCGoertzLSiebertE, et al.Treatment of recurrent and residual aneurysms with the woven EndoBridge device: analysis of 11 patients and review of the literature. World Neurosurg2019; 129: e677–e685. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.248.
57.
AlpayKNaniaAParkkolaR, et al.The outcomes of recurrent wide-necked intracranial aneurysms treated with the Woven EndoBridge (WEB): a retrospective bicenter study. J Neuroradiol2022; 49: 298–304. DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2021.05.008.
58.
MantillaDEVeraDDOrtizAF, et al.The Woven EndoBridge device, an effective and safe alternative endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysm-systematic review. Interv Neuroradiol2023. Online ahead of print. DOI: 10.1177/15910199231201544.
59.
BergerPBBhattDLFusterV, et al.Bleeding complications with dual antiplatelet therapy among patients with stable vascular disease or risk factors for vascular disease: results from the Clopidogrel for High Atherothrombotic Risk and Ischemic Stabilization, Management, and Avoidance (CHARISMA) trial. Circulation2010; 121: 2575–2583. DOI: 10.1161/circulationaha.109.895342.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
