TY - JOUR
T1 - Classification of cavernous internal carotid artery tortuosity
T2 - A predictor of procedural complexity in Pipeline embolization
AU - Lin, Li Mei
AU - Colby, Geoffrey P.
AU - Jiang, Bowen
AU - Uwandu, Chiedozie
AU - Huang, Judy
AU - Tamargo, Rafael J.
AU - Coon, Alexander
PY - 2015/9/1
Y1 - 2015/9/1
N2 - Background Flow diverters are increasingly used for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Understanding cavernous internal carotid artery (cICA) tortuosity may help to predict procedural complexities of deploying flow diverters. Methods Pipeline embolization device (PED) neurointerventions for ICA aneurysms proximal to the ICA termination were reviewed. Cavernous ICA tortuosity was measured as a ratio D/AP, where D=height difference of the anterior and posterior genus, AP=sum of the angles of the anterior (A) and posterior (P) genus. Four types of cICA tortuosity were proposed. An analysis of variance regression and Fisher's exact test were performed to analyze differences among the types. Results Cavernous ICA tortuosity was categorized into minimal (type I, n=28), moderate (type II-III, n=29), and severe (type IV, n=26). The groups were comparable for patient age (mean ± SEM years, type I: 55.6±10.4, II-III: 56.4±14.4, IV: 55±12.8) and aneurysm size (mean±SEM mm, type I: 6.25±3.5, II-III: 7.6±4.9, IV: 9.11±4.9). Analysis of variance demonstrated significant differences in procedural fluoroscopy time (mean ± SEM min, type I: 29.8 ±8.4, II-III: 44.9±34.1, IV: 52.6±17.2, p<0.005) and mean ± SEM D/AP (type I: 0.008±0.0008, II-III: 0.141 ±0.07, IV: 0.482±0.365, p<0.0001). Procedural complexity was also statistically significant (p<0.005) with 4%, 28%, and 35% of cases in types I, II-III, and IV, respectively, requiring intraprocedural PED removal or balloon post-processing of the implanted PED. Conclusions We propose a classification system for cICA tortuosity based on measurements of the anterior and posterior genu geometry. This classification correlates strongly with markers of PED procedural complexity and may be helpful in pre-procedure prognostication.
AB - Background Flow diverters are increasingly used for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Understanding cavernous internal carotid artery (cICA) tortuosity may help to predict procedural complexities of deploying flow diverters. Methods Pipeline embolization device (PED) neurointerventions for ICA aneurysms proximal to the ICA termination were reviewed. Cavernous ICA tortuosity was measured as a ratio D/AP, where D=height difference of the anterior and posterior genus, AP=sum of the angles of the anterior (A) and posterior (P) genus. Four types of cICA tortuosity were proposed. An analysis of variance regression and Fisher's exact test were performed to analyze differences among the types. Results Cavernous ICA tortuosity was categorized into minimal (type I, n=28), moderate (type II-III, n=29), and severe (type IV, n=26). The groups were comparable for patient age (mean ± SEM years, type I: 55.6±10.4, II-III: 56.4±14.4, IV: 55±12.8) and aneurysm size (mean±SEM mm, type I: 6.25±3.5, II-III: 7.6±4.9, IV: 9.11±4.9). Analysis of variance demonstrated significant differences in procedural fluoroscopy time (mean ± SEM min, type I: 29.8 ±8.4, II-III: 44.9±34.1, IV: 52.6±17.2, p<0.005) and mean ± SEM D/AP (type I: 0.008±0.0008, II-III: 0.141 ±0.07, IV: 0.482±0.365, p<0.0001). Procedural complexity was also statistically significant (p<0.005) with 4%, 28%, and 35% of cases in types I, II-III, and IV, respectively, requiring intraprocedural PED removal or balloon post-processing of the implanted PED. Conclusions We propose a classification system for cICA tortuosity based on measurements of the anterior and posterior genu geometry. This classification correlates strongly with markers of PED procedural complexity and may be helpful in pre-procedure prognostication.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941759587&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941759587&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011298
DO - 10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011298
M3 - Article
C2 - 24996435
AN - SCOPUS:84941759587
SN - 1759-8478
VL - 7
SP - 628
EP - 633
JO - Journal of neurointerventional surgery
JF - Journal of neurointerventional surgery
IS - 9
ER -