Abstract

Background: The Raymond-Roy classification has been the standard for neck recurrences following endovascular coiling with three grades. Several modified classification systems with subdivisions have been reported in literature but it is unclear whether this adds value in predicting recurrence or retreatment. Our aim is to assess if these subdivisions aid in predicting recurrence and need for retreatment.Methods: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing endovascular coiling between 2013 and 2014. Patients requiring stent assistance or other embolization devices were excluded from the study. The neck residue was graded at time of coiling on the cerebral angiogram and subsequent 6, 24, and 60 months MRA. Correlation between grade at coiling and follow-up with need for subsequent retreatment was assessed.Results: Overall, 17/200 (8.5%) cases required retreatment within 5 years of initial coiling. 4/130 (3.1%) required retreatment within 5 years with initial Grade 0 at coiling, 6/24 cases (25%) of those Grade 2a, 4/20 cases (20%) Grade 2b, 3/8 (38%) Grade 3, and none of those with Grade 1. Large aneurysms ≥11 mm had an increased risk of aneurysm recurrence and retreatment. About 9.7% of ruptured aneurysms required retreatment versus 4.4% for unruptured. About 55% of carotid ophthalmic aneurysms were retreated.Conclusion: Although the modified classification system was significantly predictive of progressive recurrence and need for retreatment, no significant difference between the subdivisions of Grade 2 was observed. Similar predictive value was seen when using the Raymond-Roy classification compared to the new modified, limiting the usefulness of the new system in clinical practice.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.