Endovascular coil embolization of intracranial aneurysms has become so influential due to incredible developments in micro catheter and micro wire methods and technologies. However, the migration of coils to common arteries in the treatment of wide-necked and fusiform aneurysms has led to some technical difficulties (
6). Additionally, the reconstruction of defective vessel walls is quite difficult without a supportive frame such as stents. Such a condition also causes the development of recurrences in wide-necked aneurysms treated with coils. In their study, Murayama et al. reported recurrence rates of 35.3% for large aneurysms and 59.1% for giant aneurysms. In addition, the endovascular treatment of this type of aneurysms with coils is too expensive and leads to financial burdens (
7,
8).
Such different methods as balloon remodeling, stent-first, balloon-in-stent, stent-jack, jailed catheter and telescopic stenting are used in order to stabilize coils in aneurysmal sacs. In the study performed by Lylyk et al., the rates of mortality and morbidity in patients treated with stents in company with coils were accounted for as 6.3% and 10.9%, respectively. Interventional procedures were required to be repeated in 19% of these patients due to insufficient occlusions (
9).
Flow diverter stents lead to slow occlusion in time by decreasing the flow in the aneurysm. Complementing occlusion with flow diverter stents takes longer time compared with surgical and coil treatments (
10,
11). In a study by Malatesta et al., the rates of aneurysmal occlusions were reported as 60% at month 3, 73% at month 6, and 89% at month 12 (
12). In our study, while partial filling was observed in aneurysmal necks of three patients on control angiographies performed at month 6, the aneurysms were entirely occluded on 1-year control angiographies. Also, in the study performed by Brinjikji et al., in 1451 patients with 1654 aneurysms, aneurysm occlusion rates were detected as 76% (
1). In our study, occlusion rates of aneurysms were also found as 77.2 % at the sixth month and 90.9% at the end of the first year.
In reports, recurrence rates are pointed out to be lower in the treatment of wide-necked aneurysms with flow diverter stents, and recurred aneurysms are also reported as minimal due to lower likelihood of occlusions in time (
13). In one of our patients with recurred aneurysm whose aneurysm was treated with coil, a flow diverter stent was placed in a way to cover the whole neck. On control angiography at month 6, the patient was reoperated due to continuation of filling on the aneurysmal neck at the same rate, and another flow diverter stent was placed. On angiography performed at month 6 after the second intervention, a partial residual filling was observed on the aneurysmal neck.
A potential adverse effect of endovascular treatment of aneurysms with stents is stent-induced thrombosis, and the main reason of the problem is hyperactivated thrombocytes (
14). Ischemic strokes may develop as a result of thrombus and distal thromboembolic events forming along the stent wall. Encountering ischemic strokes is higher in large and giant aneurysms (
1). Also in our study, a multiple number of embolic infarctions developed in the right cerebral hemisphere in one patient one day after intervention. A left hemiplegia developed in the patient.
In-stent stenosis is another complication seen in the treatment of aneurysms with stents. Among the reasons leading to in-stent stenosis, possible inflammation and neointimal proliferation after stent placement are considered to be culprits (
14). In our study, minimal in-stent hyperplasia was observed in one patient’s angiographic investigations performed at month 3. The patient reported that he had not regularly complied with anti-thrombocyte treatment; so the medical treatment was planned again. On one-year angiographic images, no in-stent or intimal hyperplasia was determined.
The risk of developing perforating infarctions is higher in posterior circulation compared to anterior circulation. The reason is insufficiency of collateral circulation and sensitivity of brain stem formations to perfusions (
1). So, no endovascular treatments should be performed in posterior circulation, unless necessary. In our study, a flow diverter stent was placed in a patient’s aneurysm in partially thrombosized basilar artery due to the occurrence of frequently repeated infarctions. No complications developed in intra- and postoperative periods. On one-year control angiographic images, it was observed that aneurysmal filling completely disappeared, and the flow diverter stent placed was preserving the patency.
The incidence of subarachnoid hemorrhages based on delayed aneurysmal ruptures in patients treated with flow diverter stents is approximately 4%, although exactly unknown (
1). However, worries about the risk of delayed aneurysmal ruptures are so serious that one of the leading companies in the field has announced a warning notice on not using Silk flow diverter stents without coils due to risk of death (
15). Despite the existence of studies reporting that using coils decreases such complication rates, the extent to which Silk flow diverter stents lead to death without using coils still remains unknown. In our study, there are no patients developing subarachnoid hemorrhages led by delayed aneurysmal ruptures.
Intraparenchymal hemorrhages are also other complications developing as a result of using flow diverter stents with no relationships to aneurysmal ruptures. However unknown the mechanism leading to these hemorrhages remains, some factors such as hemorrhagic transformation and use of anti-platelet are alleged as guilty culprits (
16-
18). No intraparenchymal hemorrhages were observed in our study although the rates of the hemorrhages were reported to range between 0% and 10% in several studies (
16-
18).
One of the most significant advantages of flow diverter stents is to obtain the openness of arteries originated from the wall of the aneurysm or from the common artery wall to be covered with a stent. As opposed to closed stents (without gaps), porous structure of flow diverter stents (with gaps) allows blood to pass. In the study by Szikora et al., flow diverter stents were used to close a total of 28 origins of arteries, 17 consisting of ophthalmic arteries, five of posterior communicant arteries and four of anterior choroidal arteries (
13). Szikora et al. had to place second, third or fourth flow diverter stents in the same patient. In one of these patients, no flow was observed in the ophthalmic artery shortly after the treatment, and the occlusion of retinal artery was observed in the patient. In control investigations at month 6, occlusions of ophthalmic arteries were detected in two patients exposed to third or fourth placements of flow diverter stents (
13). In our study, however, anterior choroidal artery was originated from the aneurysm neck in one patient. In angiographic investigations performed at month 6 after placing a flow diverter stent, it was seen that the aneurysm was entirely occluded, and the anterior choroidal artery was preserving the patency.
In the treatment with flow diverter stents, more than one stent may overlappingly be used or placed in a telescopical way. The ability of stents to be placed telescopically allows them to be reused in the treatment process with flow diverter stents in the existence of residual or recurrent aneurysms (
19,
20). In one of our patients previously treated with a flow diverter stent, in whom a difference was not seen in terms of aneurysmal filling in 6-month angiographic investigations, a second flow diverter stent was telescopically placed. On 6-month angiographic images after the intervention, minimal residual filling was observed at the aneurysmal neck. As well as this patient, two additional stents in one patient and three additional stents in another were telescopically placed in our study.
In conclusion, flow diverter stents are safe and reliable treatment modalities, especially in the treatment of wide-necked intracranial aneurysms due to high aneurysmal occlusion rates, and lower rates of morbidity and mortality. Flow diverter stents are also known as life-saving procedures in aneurysms where arteries are originated from the aneurysmal wall to be covered by stenting or in patients that cannot be treated with surgical interventions. We consider that more comprehensive clinical and angiographic studies including long-term periods are needed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flow diverter stents.