The device was not returned for analysis as they were implanted in the patients.Attempts have been made to obtain additional information, however, our attempts were unsuccessful.The flow diverter device performed as intended; as indicated by successful deployment of the device in the intended landing zone to treat an aneurysm located.There was no device issue reported during the procedure.Intracranial hemorrhage and ischemia are known inherent risk of endovascular procedure and is documented in the flow diverter device¿s instruction for use (ifu).In these events, the cause of the intracranial hemorrhage and the ischemic event cannot be reliably determined; however, per the reported information, and review of ifu, the most likely cause for the complaint is the patients¿ condition.Linked events: 2029214-2017-00666 2029214-2017-00667.
|
Citation: ¿flow diversion in ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis¿ t.P.Madaelil, c.J.Moran, d.T.Cross and a.P.Kansagra american journal of neuroradiology march 2017, 38 (3) 590-595; doi: https://doi.Org/10.3174/ajnr.A5030 medtronic received report that the flow diverter (fd) was used to treatment121of 126 patients, competitive flow diverter was used in the remaining 5/126 of cases.Aneurysm re-rupture occurred following fd placement in 6/126 of aneurysms.4 re-ruptures occurred during or within the first 24 hours of treatment.Hemorrhagic complications not related to aneurysm re-rupture occurred in 5/126 of patients.One was an asymptomatic cerebellar hemorrhage.Ischemic complications occurred in 5/111 of patients, of whom 4/111 were symptomatic.Median age was 51 years (interquartile range, 45¿60 years), and 71% of patients were women.
|