Advertisement

Clip Versus Coil Debate

  • Donnie L. Bell
  • Ronil V. Chandra
  • Thabele M. Leslie-Mazwi
  • Joshua A. Hirsch
Chapter

Abstract

Microsurgical clipping and endovascular coiling are effective treatment modalities for the treatment of unruptured and ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Several randomized controlled trials and numerous observational studies have compared these two modalities in the ruptured and unruptured settings, suggesting improved initial outcomes with endovascular coiling yet greater durability with microsurgical clipping. Due to the introduction of a number of novel devices to the endovascular armamentarium, with flow diverters being the most mature, as well as minimally invasive microsurgical approaches, the microsurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling debate has expanded to include new endovascular devices, hybrid treatments, and minimally invasive microsurgical approaches.

Keywords

Intracranial microsurgery Aneurysm Clip in microsurgery Coil in microsurgery Flow diversion in microsurgery Clip versus coil debate Microsurgical clipping Endovascular coiling 

References

  1. 1.
    Smith RR, Zubkov YN, Tarassoli Y. The history of aneurysm surgery. In: Cerebral aneurysms: microvascular and endovascular management. New York: Springer US; 1994. p. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guglielmi G, Viñuela F, Duckwiler G, et al. Endovascular treatment of posterior circulation aneurysms by electrothrombosis using electrically detachable coils. J Neurosurg. 1992;77(4):515–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rezek I, Mousan G, Wang Z, Murad MH, Kallmes DF. Coil type does not affect angiographic follow-up outcomes of cerebral aneurysm coiling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(9):1769–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vanninen R, Koivisto T, Saari T, Hernesniemi J, Vapalahti M. Ruptured intracranial aneurysms: acute endovascular treatment with electrolytically detachable coils--a prospective randomized study. Radiology. 1999;211:325–36.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Koivisto T, Vanninen R, Hurskainen H, Saari T, Hernesniemi J, Vapalahti M. Outcomes of early endovascular versus surgical treatment of ruptured cerebral aneurysms. A prospective randomized study. Stroke. 2000;31(10):2369–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Molyneux AJ, Birks J, Clarke A, Sneade M, Kerr RSC. The durability of endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping of ruptured cerebral aneurysms: 18 year follow-up of the UK cohort of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT). Lancet. 2015;385(9969):691–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Scott RB, Eccles F, Molyneux AJ, Kerr RSC, Rothwell PM, Carpenter K. Improved cognitive outcomes with endovascular coiling of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: neuropsychological outcomes from the international subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT). Stroke. 2010;41(8):1743–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ogilvy CS. Neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling of patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Stroke. 2003;34(10):2540–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Darsaut TE, Jack AS, Kerr RS, Raymond J. International subarachnoid aneurysm trial – ISAT part II: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14(1):156.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zaidi HA, Montoure A, Elhadi A, et al. Long-term functional outcomes and predictors of shunt-dependent hydrocephalus after treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms in the BRAT trial: revisiting the clip vs coil debate. Neurosurgery. 2015;76(5):608–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    McDougall CG, Spetzler RF, Zabramski JM, Partovi S, Hills NK, Nakaji P. The barrow ruptured aneurysm trial. J Neurosurg. 2015;123(September):609–17.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lanzino G, Murad MH, D’Urso PI, Rabinstein AA. Coil embolization versus clipping for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis of prospective controlled published studies. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(9):1764–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Fan J, Kallmes DF, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ. Comparative effectiveness of ruptured cerebral aneurysm therapies: propensity score analysis of clipping versus coiling. Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35(1):164–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Connolly ES, Rabinstein AA, Carhuapoma JR, et al. Guidelines for the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2012;43(6):1711–37.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Steiner T, Juvela S, Unterberg A, Jung C, Forsting M, Rinkel G. European stroke organization guidelines for the management of intracranial aneurysms and subarachnoid haemorrhage. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013;35(2):93–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McCracken DJ, Lovasik BP, McCracken CE, et al. Resolution of oculomotor nerve palsy secondary to posterior communicating artery aneurysms: comparison of clipping and coiling. Neurosurgery. 2015;77(6):931–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bhatia S, Sekula RF, Quigley MR, Williams R, Ku A. Role of calcification in the outcomes of treated, unruptured, intracerebral aneurysms. Acta Neurochir. 2011;153(4):905–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elijovich L, Higashida RT, Lawton MT, Duckwiler G, Giannotta S, Johnston SC. Predictors and outcomes of intraprocedural rupture in patients treated for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: the CARAT study. Stroke. 2008;39(5):1501–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mahaney KB, Brown RD, Meissner I, et al. Age-related differences in unruptured intracranial aneurysms: 1-year outcomes. J Neurosurg. 2014;121(5):1024–38.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McDonald JS, McDonald RJ, Fan J, Kallmes DF, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ. Comparative effectiveness of unruptured cerebral aneurysm therapies: propensity score analysis of clipping versus coiling. Stroke. 2013;44(4):988–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thompson BG, Brown RD, Amin-Hanjani S, et al. Guidelines for the management of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms, Stroke. 2015;46(8):2368–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lad SP, Babu R, Rhee MS, et al. Long-term economic impact of coiling vs clipping for unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(6):1000–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nelson PK, Lylyk P, Szikora I, Wetzel SG, Wanke I, Fiorella D. The pipeline embolization device for the intracranial treatment of aneurysms trial. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(1):34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Becske T, Kallmes DF, Saatci I, et al. Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: results from a multicenter clinical trial. Radiology. 2013;267(3):858–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Becske T, Potts M, Shapiro M, Kallmes D, Nelson PK. Pipeline for uncoilable or failed aneurysms: 3-year follow-up results. J Neurosurg. 2016;14:1–8.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Brinjikji W, Murad MH, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ, Kallmes DF. Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow diverters: a meta-analysis. Stroke. 2013;44(2):442–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rouchaud A, Brinjikji W, Lanzino G, Cloft HJ, Kadirvel R, Kallmes DF. Delayed hemorrhagic complications after flow diversion for intracranial aneurysms: a literature overview. Neuroradiology. 2016;58(2):171–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Delgado Almandoz JE, Crandall BM, Scholz JM, et al. Last-recorded P2Y12 reaction units value is strongly associated with thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications occurring up to 6 months after treatment in patients with cerebral aneurysms treated with the pipeline embolization device. Am J Neuroradiol. 2014;35:128–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chalouhi N, Tjoumakaris S, Starke RM, et al. Comparison of flow diversion and coiling in large unruptured intracranial saccular aneurysms. Stroke. 2013;44(8):2150–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Turjman F, Levrier O, Combaz X, et al. EVIDENCE trial: design of a phase 2, randomized, controlled, multicenter study comparing flow diversion and traditional endovascular strategy in unruptured saccular wide-necked intracranial aneurysms. Neuroradiology. 2014;57(1):49–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Deshmukh VR, Kakarla UK, Figueiredo EG, Zabramski JM, Spetzler RF. Long-term clinical and angiographic follow-up of unclippable wrapped intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2006;58(3):434–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yoon MA, Kim E, Kwon B-J, et al. Muslinoma and muslin-induced foreign body inflammatory reactions after surgical clipping and wrapping for intracranial aneurysms: imaging findings and clinical features. J Neurosurg. 2010;112(3):640–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Safavi-Abbasi S, Moron F, Sun H, et al. Techniques and outcomes of gore-Tex clip-wrapping of ruptured and Unruptured cerebral aneurysms. World Neurosurg. 2016;90:281–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Di Santo M, Vaz G, Doquier MA, Raftopoulos C. Evaluation of a clip-reinforced wrapping technique with collagen-impregnated Dacron for intracranial aneurysms inaccessible to other treatment. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015;138(2015):151–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Alaraj A, Wallace A, Dashti R, Patel P, Aletich V. Balloons in endovascular neurosurgery: history and current applications. Neurosurgery. 2014;74(2 SUPPL):163–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fiorella D, Albuquerque FC, Masaryk TJ, Rasmussen PA, McDougall CG. Balloon-in-stent technique for the constructive endovascular treatment of “ultra-wide necked” circumferential aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2005;57(6):1218-27-27. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16331170. Accessed 10 July 2014.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cai K, Zhang Y, Shen L, Ni Y, Ji Q. Comparison of stent-assisted coiling and balloon-assisted coiling in the treatment of ruptured wide-necked intracranial aneurysms in the acute period. World Neurosurg. 2016;8750(16):30855.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Griessenauer CJ, Ogilvy CS, Foreman PM, et al. Pipeline embolization device for small intracranial aneurysms: evaluation of safety and efficacy in a multicenter cohort. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(4):579–87.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Linfante I, Mayich M, Sonig A, Fujimoto J, Siddiqui A, Dabus G. Flow diversion with Pipeline Embolic Device as treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage secondary to blister aneurysms: dual-center experience and review of the literature. J Neurointerv Surg. 2016:neurintsurg-2016-012287.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kallmes DF, Brinjikji W, Boccardi E, et al. Aneurysm study of pipeline in an observational registry (ASPIRe). Interv Neurol. 2016;5(1–2):89–99.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chalouhi N, Starke RM, Yang S, et al. Extending the indications of flow diversion to small, unruptured, saccular aneurysms of the anterior circulation. Stroke. 2014;45(1):54–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Monteith SJ, Tsimpas A, Dumont AS, et al. Endovascular treatment of fusiform cerebral aneurysms with the Pipeline Embolization Device. J Neurosurg. 2014;120(4):945–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Delgado Almandoz JE, Crandall BM, Fease JL, et al. Successful endovascular treatment of three fusiform cerebral aneurysms with the pipeline embolization device in a patient with dilating HIV vasculopathy. J Neurointerv Surg. 2014;6(2):e12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Szikora I, Tura E. Evolution of flow-diverter Endothelialization and Thrombus Organization in Giant Fusiform Aneurysms after flow diversion: a histopathologic study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2015;36(9):1716–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    John S, Bain MD, Hussain MS, Bauer AM, Toth G. Long-term effect of flow diversion on large and giant aneurysms: MRI-DSA clinical correlation study. World Neurosurg. 2016;93:60–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Saatci I, Yavuz K, Ozer C, Geyik S, Cekirge HS. Treatment of intracranial aneurysms using the pipeline flow-diverter embolization device: a single-center experience with long-term follow-up results. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33(8):1436–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kulcsár Z, Houdart E, Bonafé A, et al. Intra-aneurysmal thrombosis as a possible cause of delayed aneurysm rupture after flow-diversion treatment. Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(1):20–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Fox B, Humphries WE, Doss VT, Hoit D, Elijovich L, Arthur AS. Rupture of giant vertebrobasilar aneurysm following flow diversion: mechanical stretch as a potential mechanism for early aneurysm rupture. Case Reports. 2014;2014(oct29 1):bcr2014011325-bcr2014011325.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Nossek E, Chalif DJ, Chakraborty S, Lombardo K, Black KS, Setton A. Concurrent use of the pipeline embolization device and coils for intracranial aneurysms: technique, safety, and efficacy. J Neurosurg. 2015;122(April):904–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Siddiqui AH, Kan P, Abla AA, Hopkins LN, Levy EI. Complications after treatment with pipeline embolization for giant distal intracranial aneurysms with or without coil embolization. Neurosurgery. 2012;71(2):509–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sorenson T, Brinjikji W, Lanzino G. Newer endovascular tools: a review of experimental and clinical aspects. J Neurosurg Sci. 2016;60(1):116–125. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26373669.
  52. 52.
    Fischer S, Weber A, Carolus A, Drescher F, Götz F, Weber W. Coiling of wide-necked carotid artery aneurysms assisted by a temporary bridging device (Comaneci): preliminary experience. J Neurointerv Surg. 2016;neurintsurg-2016-012664.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Segawa H, Kohno M, Nakatomi H, Sano K, Saito I, Shiokwa Y. New aneurysm clip and applier for narrow spaces: technical note. Neurosurgery. 1999;45(4):939–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Krammer MJ, Lumenta CB. The new aneurysm clip system for particularly complex aneurysm surgery: technical note. Neurosurgery. 2010;66(6):336–8.  https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000369644.26132.56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Davies JM, Lawton MT. Advances in open microsurgery for cerebral aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 2014;74(2 SUPPL):7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mocco J, Komotar RJ, Raper DMS, Kellner CP, Connolly ES, Solomon RA. The modified pterional keyhole craniotomy for open cerebrovascular surgery: a new workhorse? J Neurol Surgery, Part A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2013;74(6):400–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yildirim AE, Divanlioglu D, Karaoglu D, Cetinalp NE, Belen AD. Pure endoscopic Endonasal clipping of an incidental anterior communicating artery aneurysm. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26(4):1378–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Eloy JA, Carai A. Case report combined endoscope-assisted transclival clipping and endovascular stenting of a basilar trunk aneurysm: case report. Neurosurgery. 2008;62(March):142–3.  https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000297101.34508.43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kassam AB, Mintz AH, Gardner PA, Horowitz MB, Carrau RL, Snyderman CH. The expanded endonasal approach for an endoscopic transnasal clipping and aneurysmorrhaphy of a large vertebral artery aneurysm: Technical case report. Neurosurgery. 2006;59(1 SUPPL. 1):162–5.  https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000220047.25001.F8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Gardner PA, Vaz-Guimaraes F, Jankowitz B, et al. Endoscopic endonasal clipping of intracranial aneurysms: surgical technique and results. World Neurosurg. 2015;84(5):1380–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Szentirmai O, Hong Y, Mascarenhas L, et al. Endoscopic endonasal clip ligation of cerebral aneurysms: an anatomical feasibility study and future directions. J Neurosurg. 2015;124(February):1–6.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Crobeddu E, Lanzino G, Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ. Review of 2 decades of aneurysm-recurrence literature, part 1: reducing recurrence after endovascular coiling. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(2):266–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Johnston SC, Dowd CF, Higashida RT, Lawton MT, Duckwiler GR, Gress DR. Predictors of rehemorrhage after treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: The Cerebral Aneurysm Rerupture After Treatment (CARAT) study. Stroke. 2008;39(1):120–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Molyneux A, Kerr R, Stratton I, et al. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised trial. Lancet (London, England). 2002;360(9342):1267–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Owen CM, Montemurro N, Lawton MT. Microsurgical management of residual and recurrent aneurysms after coiling and clipping: an experience with 97 patients. Neurosurgery. 2015;62(1):92–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Islak C. The retreatment: indications, technique and results. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82(10):1659–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Waldron JS, Halbach VV, Lawton MT. Microsurgical management of incompletely coiled and recurrent aneurysms: trends, techniques, and observations on coil extrusion. Neurosurgery. 2009;64(SUPPL. 5):301–15.  https://doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000335178.15274.B4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Li K, Cho YD, Kang HS, Kim JE, Han MH, Lee YM. Endovascular management for retreatment of postsurgical intracranial aneurysms. Neuroradiology. 2013;55(11):1345–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Adeeb N, Griessenauer CJ, Moore J, et al. Pipeline embolization device for recurrent cerebral aneurysms after microsurgical clipping. World Neurosurg. 2016;93:341–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donnie L. Bell
    • 1
  • Ronil V. Chandra
    • 2
  • Thabele M. Leslie-Mazwi
    • 3
  • Joshua A. Hirsch
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Radiology and NeurologyKings County Hospital Center/SUNY Downstate Medical CenterBrooklynUSA
  2. 2.Interventional Neuroradiology, Department of ImagingMonash Health and Monash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyMassachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations