Vše

Co hledáte?

Vše
Projekty
Výsledky výzkumu
Subjekty

Rychlé hledání

  • Projekty podpořené TA ČR
  • Významné projekty
  • Projekty s nejvyšší státní podporou
  • Aktuálně běžící projekty

Chytré vyhledávání

  • Takto najdu konkrétní +slovo
  • Takto z výsledků -slovo zcela vynechám
  • “Takto můžu najít celou frázi”

Indications for alternative endovascular techniques in carotid-cavernous fistulas: A 20-year single-center experience

Identifikátory výsledku

  • Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

    <a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61383082%3A_____%2F24%3A00001392" target="_blank" >RIV/61383082:_____/24:00001392 - isvavai.cz</a>

  • Výsledek na webu

    <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38173239/" target="_blank" >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38173239/</a>

  • DOI - Digital Object Identifier

    <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15910199231217549" target="_blank" >10.1177/15910199231217549</a>

Alternativní jazyky

  • Jazyk výsledku

    angličtina

  • Název v původním jazyce

    Indications for alternative endovascular techniques in carotid-cavernous fistulas: A 20-year single-center experience

  • Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

    Background: While coiling is considered the standard treatment for carotid-cavernous fistulas (CCFs), studies demonstrating excellent results using new materials, especially flow diverter (FD) stents and liquid embolisates, are becoming more frequent. The indications and effectiveness of these alternative endovascular techniques remain unclear. Methods: A total of 22 direct and 20 indirect CCFs were included in the study. These were further subdivided based on the embolic material used: coils versus FD stents for direct and coils versus liquid embolisates for indirect CCFs. The subgroups were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: An angiographic cure was achieved in 88% of all CCFs, 93% of patients’ experienced clinical improvement or remained stable. Direct CCFs were treated with coiling (41%) or with both coils and FD stents (55%). One (4%) patient with a direct CCF was treated with FD stent alone. Statistical analysis comparing these subgroups revealed a significantly higher complete occlusion rate immediately after treatment in the coiling subgroup (67% vs. 23%, p = 0.0409). The occlusion rates at the last follow-up were similar (89% vs. 85%). Indirect CCFs were treated with coiling (35%) or liquid embolisates (65%). All three periprocedural ischemic complications were recorded within the liquid subgroup, resulting in a significantly higher clinical deterioration rate (p = 0.0333). Conclusion: FD stents in direct and liquid embolisates in indirect fistulas did not demonstrate better angiographic or clinical outcomes compared to convetional coiling. Liquid agents carried a higher risk of ischemic complications. Alternative embolization materials should be reserved for CCFs that cannot be treated with simple coiling.

  • Název v anglickém jazyce

    Indications for alternative endovascular techniques in carotid-cavernous fistulas: A 20-year single-center experience

  • Popis výsledku anglicky

    Background: While coiling is considered the standard treatment for carotid-cavernous fistulas (CCFs), studies demonstrating excellent results using new materials, especially flow diverter (FD) stents and liquid embolisates, are becoming more frequent. The indications and effectiveness of these alternative endovascular techniques remain unclear. Methods: A total of 22 direct and 20 indirect CCFs were included in the study. These were further subdivided based on the embolic material used: coils versus FD stents for direct and coils versus liquid embolisates for indirect CCFs. The subgroups were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: An angiographic cure was achieved in 88% of all CCFs, 93% of patients’ experienced clinical improvement or remained stable. Direct CCFs were treated with coiling (41%) or with both coils and FD stents (55%). One (4%) patient with a direct CCF was treated with FD stent alone. Statistical analysis comparing these subgroups revealed a significantly higher complete occlusion rate immediately after treatment in the coiling subgroup (67% vs. 23%, p = 0.0409). The occlusion rates at the last follow-up were similar (89% vs. 85%). Indirect CCFs were treated with coiling (35%) or liquid embolisates (65%). All three periprocedural ischemic complications were recorded within the liquid subgroup, resulting in a significantly higher clinical deterioration rate (p = 0.0333). Conclusion: FD stents in direct and liquid embolisates in indirect fistulas did not demonstrate better angiographic or clinical outcomes compared to convetional coiling. Liquid agents carried a higher risk of ischemic complications. Alternative embolization materials should be reserved for CCFs that cannot be treated with simple coiling.

Klasifikace

  • Druh

    J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

  • CEP obor

  • OECD FORD obor

    30103 - Neurosciences (including psychophysiology)

Návaznosti výsledku

  • Projekt

    <a href="/cs/project/NV19-04-00270" target="_blank" >NV19-04-00270: Určení hemodynamických parametrů stabilního a nestabilního plátu krkavice na in vitro modelu</a><br>

  • Návaznosti

    P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Ostatní

  • Rok uplatnění

    2024

  • Kód důvěrnosti údajů

    S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku

  • Název periodika

    Interventional Neuroradiology

  • ISSN

    1591-0199

  • e-ISSN

  • Svazek periodika

    Jan 2024

  • Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

    Jan 3

  • Stát vydavatele periodika

    US - Spojené státy americké

  • Počet stran výsledku

    9

  • Strana od-do

    1-9

  • Kód UT WoS článku

    001136484900001

  • EID výsledku v databázi Scopus