The SMART coil system is a relatively new generation of embolic coils consisting of a bare platinum coil, a detachment pusher, and a detachment handle. This study investigated the safety and efficiency of the SMART coil system in treating cerebral aneurysms.
Method
PubMed/Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched until October, 1st 2023. Non-English language, non-human studies, and non-original studies were excluded.
Results
A total of 7 studies were included. The results of our study reflected complete aneurysm occlusion (mRRC1) rate of 45% (95% CI, 0.35–0.56), neck remnant aneurysm (mRRC2) rate of 36% (95% CI, 0.30–0.42), and residual aneurysm (mRRC3) rate of 22% (95% CI, 0.12–0.38) during post-procedural assessment. Moreover, considering longest follow-up, our study showed complete aneurysm occlusion (mRRC1) rate of 66% (95% CI, 0.43–0.84), neck remnant aneurysm (mRRC2) rate of 27% (95% CI, 0.13–0.49), and residual aneurysm (mRRC3) rate of 9% (95% CI, 0.04–0.20). In addition, recanalization and retreatment rates were reported 10% (95% CI, 0.06–0.17) and 9% (95% CI, 0.06–0.12), respectively. The rates of adverse and serious adverse events were 9% (95% CI, 0.07–0.10) and 6% (95% CI, 0.01–0.22), respectively. Three studies reported a stroke rate which was 2% (95% CI, 0.00–0.13), and five studies reported a mortality rate which was 6% (95% CI, 0.03–0.11).
Conclusion
The findings suggested that the SMART coil can be a safe and efficient treatment in patients with intracranial aneurysms compared to other available treatment methods.
WiebersDOWhisnantJPHustonJ3rd, et al.Unruptured intracranial aneurysms: natural history, clinical outcome, and risks of surgical and endovascular treatment. Lancet2003; 362: 103–110. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(03)13860-3.
2.
ThompsonBGBrownRDJrAmin-HanjaniS, et al.Guidelines for the management of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American heart association/American stroke association. Stroke2015; 46: 2368–2400. DOI: 10.1161/str.0000000000000070.
3.
Unruptured intracranial aneurysms--risk of rupture and risks of surgical intervention. N Engl J Med1998; 339: 1725–1733. DOI: 10.1056/nejm199812103392401.
4.
Le RouxPDWinnHR. Management of the ruptured aneurysm. Neurosurg Clin N Am1998; 9: 525–540.
HabibiMAAmaniHMirjaniMS, et al.Predicting the radiological outcome of cerebral aneurysm treatment with machine learning algorithms; a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Interdiscip Neurosurg2024; 36: 101929. DOI: 10.1016/j.inat.2023.101929.
7.
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.
8.
StarkeRMParkMSBellonR, et al.Periprocedural safety of saccular aneurysm embolization with the Penumbra SMART Coil System: a SMART registry subset analysis. J Neurointerv Surg2022; 14. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016943.
9.
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.
10.
SchirmerCKicielinskiKYooA, et al.Abstract TP161: embolization of intracranial aneurysms using wave extra soft coils, A Part Of the penumbra smart coil system: an interim analysis of the surf study. Stroke2022; 53. DOI: 10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.TP161.
11.
MatthewJPJoanneEMPatrickMB, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ2021; 372: n71. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
12.
IlyasABuellTJChenCJ, et al.SMART coils for intracranial aneurysm embolization: initial outcomes. Clin Neurol Neurosurg2018; 164: 87–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2017.11.020.
13.
SpiottaAMParkMSBellonRJ, et al.The SMART registry: long-term results on the utility of the penumbra SMART COIL system for treatment of intracranial aneurysms and other malformations. Front Neurol2021; 12: 637551. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.637551.
14.
FargenKLenaJChaudryI, et al.E-029 Progressively soft coils for treatment of intracerebral aneurysms–an initial experience with the smart coil at two centers. British Medical Journal Publishing Group, 2017.
15.
SchirmerCKicielinskiKYooAJ, et al.Abstract TP161: embolization of intracranial aneurysms using wave extra soft coils, a part of the penumbra smart coil system: an interim analysis of the surf study. Stroke2022; 53: ATP161.
16.
SpiottaAMParkMSBellonRJ, et al.Technical success and early efficacy in 851 patients with saccular intracranial aneurysms: a subset analysis of smart, a prospective, multicenter registry assessing the embolization of neurovascular lesions using the penumbra smart coil system. World Neurosurg2021; 155: e323–e334. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2021.08.043.
17.
SokolowskiJDIlyasABuellTJ, et al.SMART coils for intracranial aneurysm embolization: follow-up outcomes. J Clin Neurosci2019; 59: 93–97. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.10.132.
18.
McAvoyMBCappuzzoJMStapletonCJ, et al.Long-term follow-up results of the SMART coil in the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Interv Neuroradiol2021; 27: 200–206. DOI: 10.1177/1591019920956890.
19.
DanielBHenrikSIoannisT, et al.SMART coils for intracranial aneurysm repair - a single center experience. BMC Neurol2020; 20: 38. DOI: 10.1186/s12883-020-1623-9.
20.
SpiottaAMBellonRJBohnstedtBN, et al.SMART registry: safety and performance of the penumbra SMART COIL system for patients with intracranial aneurysms 4 mm and smaller. Neurosurgery2022; 91: 555–561. DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000002073.
21.
StapletonCJTorokCMPatelAB. Early experience with the Penumbra SMART coil in the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: safety and efficacy. Interv Neuroradiol2016; 22: 654–658. DOI: 10.1177/1591019916663479.
22.
FargenKLenaJChaudryI, et al.E-029 Progressively soft coils for treatment of intracerebral aneurysms-an initial experience with the smart coil at two centers. J Neurointerventional Surg2017; 9: A55.
23.
SpiottaAMFargenKMLenaJ, et al.Initial technical experience with the SMART coil for the embolization of intracranial aneurysms. World Neurosurg2017; 97: 80–85. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2016.06.009.
PeachTWRicciDVentikosY. A virtual comparison of the eCLIPs device and conventional flow-diverters as treatment for cerebral bifurcation aneurysms. Cardiovasc Eng Technol2019; 10: 508–519. DOI: 10.1007/s13239-019-00424-3.
26.
De VriesJBoogaartsHDSørensenL, et al.eCLIPs bifurcation remodeling system for treatment of wide neck bifurcation aneurysms with extremely low dome-to-neck and aspect ratios: a multicenter experience. J Neurointerv Surg2021; 13: 438–442. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016354.
27.
de VriesJAquariusRSørensenL, et al.Safety and efficacy of the eCLIPs bifurcation remodelling system for the treatment of wide necked bifurcation aneurysms: 1 year results from the European eCLIPs safety, feasibility, and efficacy study (EESIS). J Neurointerv Surg2023; 15: 163–171. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2021-018460.
28.
DiestroJDBKeoughMBAshforthRA, et al.Treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms with the eCLIPs device: 5-year experience of a single center. J Neurointerv Surg2023; 15: 461–464. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018731.
29.
Abouei MehriziMAHabibiMAKeykhosraviE, et al.The safety and efficacy of eCLIPs for treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg2023; 180: 213–223 DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2023.10.011.
30.
BecskeTKallmesDFSaatciI, et al.Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology2013; 267: 858–868. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13120099.
31.
ZhangHLiLZhangH, et al.Small and medium-sized aneurysm outcomes following intracranial aneurysm treatment using the pipeline embolization device: a subgroup analysis of the plus registry. Front Neurol2022; 13: 881353. DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.881353.
32.
PhanKHuoYRJiaF, et al.Meta-analysis of stent-assisted coiling versus coiling-only for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. J Clin Neurosci2016; 31: 15–22. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2016.01.035.
33.
AlginOCorabaySAyberkG. Long-term efficacy and safety of WovenEndoBridge (WEB)-assisted cerebral aneurysm embolization. Interv Neuroradiol2022; 28: 695–701. DOI: 10.1177/15910199211060970.
34.
AsnafiSRouchaudAPierotL, et al.Efficacy and safety of the woven EndoBridge (WEB) device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2016; 37: 2287–2292. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4900.
35.
CagnazzoFLimbucciNNappiniS, et al.Y-Stent-Assisted coiling of wide-neck bifurcation intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2019; 40: 122–128. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5900.
36.
KimYDBangJSLeeSU, et al.Long-term outcomes of treatment for unruptured intracranial aneurysms in South Korea: clipping versus coiling. J Neurointerv Surg2018; 10: 1218–1222. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013757.
37.
XueGZuoQDuanG, et al.Dual stent-assisted coil embolization for intracranial wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms: a single-center experience and a systematic review and meta-analysis. World Neurosurg2019; 126: e295–e313. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.02.047.
38.
FargenKMMoccoJNealD, et al.A multicenter study of stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms with a Y configuration. Neurosurgery2013; 73: 466–472. DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000000015.
39.
ZhaoBYinRLanzinoG, et al.Endovascular coiling of wide-neck and wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol2016; 37: 1700–1705. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4834.
40.
PierotLSpelleLMolyneuxA, et al.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). Neurosurgery2016; 78: 133–141. DOI: 10.1227/neu.0000000000001106.
41.
AlshekhleeAMehtaSEdgellRC, et al.Hospital mortality and complications of electively clipped or coiled unruptured intracranial aneurysm. Stroke2010; 41: 1471–1476. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.110.580647.
42.
KrayenbühlNErdemEOinasM, et al.Symptomatic and silent ischemia associated with microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms: evaluation with diffusion-weighted MRI. Stroke2009; 40: 129–133. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.108.524777.
SamsonDBatjerHHBowmanG, et al.A clinical study of the parameters and effects of temporary arterial occlusion in the management of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery1994; 34: 22–29; discussion 28–29.
45.
KashkoushAIJankowitzBTNguyenC, et al.Perioperative stroke after cerebral aneurysm clipping: risk factors and postoperative impact. J Clin Neurosci2017; 44: 188–195. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.030.
46.
ByounHSBangJSOhCW, et al.The incidence of and risk factors for ischemic complications after microsurgical clipping of unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms and the efficacy of intraoperative monitoring of somatosensory evoked potentials: a retrospective study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg2016; 151: 128–135. DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.10.008.
47.
HwangGKimJGSongKS, et al.Delayed ischemic stroke after stent-assisted coil placement in cerebral aneurysm: characteristics and optimal duration of preventative dual antiplatelet therapy. Radiology2014; 273: 194–201. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14140070.
48.
MatsumotoYNakaiKTsutsumiM, et al.Onset time of ischemic events and antiplatelet therapy after intracranial stent-assisted coil embolization. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis2014; 23: 771–777. DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.07.008.
49.
GonzalezSMIordanouJAdamsW, et al.Effect of stent porosity, platelet function test usage, and dual antiplatelet therapy duration on clinical and radiographic outcomes after stenting for cerebral aneurysms: a meta-analysis. World Neurosurg2023; 171: 159–166. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.12.055.
50.
KonoKShintaniAYoshimuraR, et al.Triple antiplatelet therapy with addition of cilostazol to aspirin and clopidogrel for Y-stent-assisted coil embolization of cerebral aneurysms. Acta Neurochir (Wien)2013; 155: 1549–1557. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-013-1771-4.
51.
RossenJDChalouhiNWassefSN, et al.Incidence of cerebral ischemic events after discontinuation of clopidogrel in patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with stent-assisted techniques. J Neurosurg2012; 117: 929–933. DOI: 10.3171/2012.8.Jns12185.
52.
ŚwiątnickiWSzymańskiJSzymańskaA, et al.Predictors of intraoperative aneurysm rupture, aneurysm remnant, and brain ischemia following microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms: single-center, retrospective cohort study. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg2021; 82: 410–416. DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1721004.
53.
GoertzLHamischCTelentschakS, et al.Impact of aneurysm shape on intraoperative rupture during clipping of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. World Neurosurg2018; 118: e806–e812. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.07.058.
54.
GoertzLHamischCKabbaschC, et al.Impact of aneurysm shape and neck configuration on cerebral infarction during microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms. J Neurosurg2020; 132: 1539–1547. DOI: 10.3171/2019.1.Jns183193.
55.
HanJPanHYaoL, et al.Comparison of microsurgical clipping with intravascular interventional embolization in the treatment of ruptured aneurysms and risk factors for intraoperative rupture and bleeding. Am J Transl Res2023; 15: 3451–3459.
56.
FrączekMJBłońskiMJKliśKM, et al.Predictors of intraoperative intracranial aneurysm rupture in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage: a retrospective analysis. Acta Neurol Belg2023; 123: 1717–1724. DOI: 10.1007/s13760-022-02005-z.
57.
GuoLMZhouHYXuJW, et al.Risk factors related to aneurysmal rebleeding. World Neurosurg2011; 76: 292–298. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.03.025.
58.
MolyneuxAJKerrRSYuLM, et al.International subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised comparison of effects on survival, dependency, seizures, rebleeding, subgroups, and aneurysm occlusion. Lancet2005; 366: 809–817. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)67214-5.
59.
CARAT Investigators. Rates of delayed rebleeding from intracranial aneurysms are low after surgical and endovascular treatment. Stroke2006; 37: 1437–1442. DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000221331.01830.ce.
60.
JohnstonSCDowdCFHigashidaRT, et al.Predictors of rehemorrhage after treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: the cerebral aneurysm rerupture after treatment (CARAT) study. Stroke2008; 39: 120–125. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.107.495747.
61.
LiHPanRWangH, et al.Clipping versus coiling for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke2013; 44: 29–37. DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.112.663559.
62.
MolyneuxAKerrRStrattonI, et al.International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised trial. Lancet2002; 360: 1267–1274. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(02)11314-6.
63.
ItoYYamamotoTIkedaG, et al.Early retreatment after surgical clipping of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Acta Neurochir (Wien)2017; 159: 1627–1632. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-017-3245-6.
64.
ChalouhiNBovenziCDThakkarV, et al.Long-term catheter angiography after aneurysm coil therapy: results of 209 patients and predictors of delayed recurrence and retreatment. J Neurosurg2014; 121: 1102–1106. DOI: 10.3171/2014.7.Jns132433.
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.
