2013
DOI: 10.5137/1019-5149.jtn.7710-12.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Endovascular treatment of intracranial ophthalmic segment aneurysms: a series and literature review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Each of these risks is avoided in an endovascular approach, such as balloon-assisted coiling (i.e., inflating a balloon at the base of the aneurysm during coiling to secure each coil within the aneurysm's dome), stent-assisted coiling (i.e., deploying a stent at base of the aneurysm to secure the coils within the aneurysm's dome), flow diversion, or flow diversion with adjunctive coiling. While avoiding the challenges of an open approach is what facilitates lower visual morbidity when treating OphAs endovascularly, the recanalization and recurrence rates are higher (21, 24,25,27,[29][30][31]. In a cohort of 138, Lu et al (21) found a 16.1% vs. 2.4% rate of visual deficits after clipping vs. coiling, respectively, while D'Urso et al (31) recognized a 17% rate of recurrence and a 9% rate of re-treatment among a series of 74 carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms treated with coiling alone.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each of these risks is avoided in an endovascular approach, such as balloon-assisted coiling (i.e., inflating a balloon at the base of the aneurysm during coiling to secure each coil within the aneurysm's dome), stent-assisted coiling (i.e., deploying a stent at base of the aneurysm to secure the coils within the aneurysm's dome), flow diversion, or flow diversion with adjunctive coiling. While avoiding the challenges of an open approach is what facilitates lower visual morbidity when treating OphAs endovascularly, the recanalization and recurrence rates are higher (21, 24,25,27,[29][30][31]. In a cohort of 138, Lu et al (21) found a 16.1% vs. 2.4% rate of visual deficits after clipping vs. coiling, respectively, while D'Urso et al (31) recognized a 17% rate of recurrence and a 9% rate of re-treatment among a series of 74 carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms treated with coiling alone.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%