Low-Profile Intra-Aneurysmal Flow Disruptor WEB 17 versus WEB Predecessor Systems for Treatment of Small Intracranial Aneurysms: Comparative Analysis of Procedural Safety and Feasibility [INTERVENTIONAL]

Low-Profile Intra-Aneurysmal Flow Disruptor WEB 17 versus WEB Predecessor Systems for Treatment of Small Intracranial Aneurysms: Comparative Analysis of Procedural Safety and Feasibility [INTERVENTIONAL]: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

The Woven EndoBridge 17 has recently been introduced to the market for facilitated endovascular treatment of small bifurcation aneurysms (≤7 mm) with low-profile microcatheters. We compared the Woven EndoBridge 17 with its predecessor versions in terms of procedural safety and feasibility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

This was a multicenter review of aneurysms ranging from 3 to 7 mm treated with the Woven EndoBridge between 2011 and 2019. Aneurysm characteristics, procedural parameters, and complications were retrospectively compared between treatment with the Woven EndoBridge 17 and a control group that was treated with its predecessor versions, using inverse probability of treatment weighting.

RESULTS:

Thirty-eight aneurysms treated with a Woven EndoBridge 17 (mean size, 4.9 ± 1.5 mm) and 70 treated with a predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17 (mean size, 5.6 ± 1.4 mm) were included. The predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17 had a higher failure rate (10.3%) than the Woven EndoBridge 17 (0%, P = .05). Additional stent placement was performed more often with the predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17 (10.0%) than with the Woven EndoBridge 17 (2.6%, adjusted P = .005). The predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17 was associated with a higher thromboembolic event rate (14.3%) than the Woven EndoBridge 17 (5.3%, adjusted P = .002). Neurologic complications (Woven EndoBridge 17: 2.6%; predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17: 2.9%, adjusted P = 1.0) and immediate complete aneurysm occlusion rates (Woven EndoBridge 17: 57.9%; predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17: 54.3%, adjusted P = .21) did not differ significantly between groups.

CONCLUSIONS:

In the current study, the Woven EndoBridge 17 was associated with a potentially lower thromboembolic event rate than the predecessor version of the Woven EndoBridge 17, without compromising the immediate aneurysm occlusion rate. Long-term clinical and angiographic outcome analysis will be necessary to draw a definite conclusion.