Abstract
The necessity for platelet-inhibition testing before aneurysm treatment in patients premedicated with antiplatelet agents is controversial. Using the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry, we studied complication rates in groups of patients who underwent platelet testing and those who did not undergo platelet testing to determine if these test results were associated with improved outcomes. Patients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry with an unruptured aneurysm were categorized as those who underwent platelet testing before Pipeline embolization device treatment or those who did not. Complication rates were compared by using the Fisher exact or Pearson χ(2) test. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine if platelet function testing was independently associated with poor outcomes after adjusting for age, number of devices and aneurysms, aneurysm location and size, and practitioner and center volume. Compared with the patients who received a Pipeline embolization device without platelet testing, those who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement experienced higher rates of intracranial hemorrhage (0 of 187 [0.0%] vs 12 of 511 [2.3%], respectively; P = .04), neurologic morbidity (4 of 187 [2.1%] vs 42 of 511 [8.2%], respectively; P < .01), and combined neurologic morbidity and mortality (6 of 187 [3.2%] vs 45 of 511 [8.8%], respectively; P = .01). More patients in the platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device group were treated with multiple devices (227 [38.0%] vs 56 [27.8] patients, respectively; P = .01). On multivariate analysis, the group of patients who underwent platelet testing and Pipeline embolization device placement had higher odds of neurologic morbidity (OR, 3.25 [95% CI, 1.10-9.61]; P = .03). Platelet testing in patients who undergo Pipeline embolization device placement is associated with higher rates of morbidity. Additional prospective studies are needed to determine if and when platelet testing in these patients is appropriate.
Highlights
MethodsPatients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry with an unruptured aneurysm were categorized as those who underwent platelet testing before Pipeline embolization device treatment or those who did not
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSEThe necessity for platelet-inhibition testing before aneurysm treatment in patients premedicated with antiplatelet agents is controversial
Platelet testing in patients who undergo Pipeline embolization device placement is associated with higher rates of morbidity
Summary
Patients in the International Retrospective Study of Pipeline Embolization Device registry with an unruptured aneurysm were categorized as those who underwent platelet testing before Pipeline embolization device treatment or those who did not. Study Design and Participants We retrospectively evaluated all patients with an unruptured intracranial aneurysm who were treated with the Pipeline embolization device between July 2008 and February 2013 in 1 of 17 centers in 6 countries experienced in PED use. The local institutional review boards or ethics committees approved the study and granted waivers of informed consent for use of the patients’ retrospective data. This postmarket observational registry was funded and supported by Covidien, which had scientific oversight of the study’s steering committee members. Any patient with a ruptured aneurysm was excluded from the analysis
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: 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.
