Comparison of pipeline embolization device and tubridge flow diverter for posterior circulation aneurysms: A multicentre propensity score matched study

Abstract

Rationale and objectivesThe off-label use of flow diverters (FDs) has broadened to include treating aneurysms in posterior circulation (PC). A novel flow diverter, the Tubridge flow diverter (TFD), has been created in China specifically for treating PC aneurysms. However, studies comparing between pipeline embolization device (PED) and TFD are rare. Thus, our study aimed to explore the effectiveness of PED and TFD in the treatment of PC aneurysms using a propensity score matched cohort design. MethodsRetrospective data collection was conducted on patients who underwent treatment with either PED or TFD over the period from 2015 through 2020. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to calibrate for patient age; history of ischemic stroke; aneurysm size; morphology; location and neck; number of FDs; parent vessel diameter; and the employment of assisted coiling and balloon techniques. Data on previously ruptured aneurysms was not included in the analysis. A comparison was conducted between the two devices to assess perioperative complications, aneurysm occlusion rates, and functional outcomes. ResultsA total of 252 PC aneurysms were treated in 248 patients. Clinical and imaging follow-ups were lost in 26 and 47 patients, respectively. Major perioperative complications occurred in 7.5% of the cases, with favorable clinical outcomes in 91.0% and complete occlusion in 79.1%. Eighty-two (32.5%) aneurysms were treated with TFD, while 170 (67.5%) aneurysms were treated with PED. PSM was used to account for these significant variations, producing 82 matched pairs of unruptured aneurysms treated with PED or TFD. In terms of functional and angiographic outcomes, no significant differences were found between PED and TFD (functional outcome, p = 0.594 and angiographic outcome, p = 0.415). However, more perioperative major complications were found in patients treated with TFD (p = 0.005) compared with those receiving PED. ConclusionThe comparative study of PED and TFD in the treatment of PC aneurysms resulted in positive clinical results and sustained occlusion rates, with acceptable perioperative complications. However, higher quality studies are needed to enhance our understanding of the use of FDs for treating of PC aneurysms.