Comprehensive Analysis of Post-Pipeline Endothelialization and Remodeling
Vera Sharashidze,Eytan Raz,Erez Nossek,Svetlana Kvint,Howard Riina,Caleb Rutledge,Jacob Baranoski,Ayaz Khawaja,Charlotte Chung,Peter Kim Nelson,Maksim Shapiro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A8228
2024-07-08
Abstract:Background and purpose: Successful post-flow-diverter endoluminal reconstruction is widely believed to require endothelial overgrowth of the aneurysmal inflow zone. However, endothelialization/neointimal overgrowth is a complex process, over which we currently have very limited influence. Less emphasized is vascular remodeling of the target arterial segment, the dynamic response of the vessel to flow-diverter implantation. This process is distinct from flow modifications in covered branches. It appears that basic angiographic methods allow simple and useful observations. The purpose of this article was to quantitatively evaluate observable postimplantation changes in target vessels following deployment of Pipeline endoluminal constructs. Materials and methods: One hundred consecutive adults with unruptured, previously untreated, nondissecting aneurysms treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device with Shield Technology and the availability of follow-up conventional angiography were studied with 2D DSA imaging. Target vessel size; Pipeline Embolization Device diameter; endothelial thickness; and various demographic, antiplatelet, and device-related parameters were recorded and analyzed. Results: The thickness of neointimal overgrowth (mean, 0.3 [SD, 0.1] mm; range, 0.1-0.7 mm) is inversely correlated with age and is independent of vessel size, smoking status, sex, and degree of platelet inhibition. The decrease in lumen diameter caused by neointimal overgrowth, however, appears counteracted by outward remodeling (dilation) of the target arterial segment. This leads to an increase in the diameter with a corresponding decrease in length (foreshortening) of the implanted Pipeline Embolization Device. This physiologic remodeling process affects optimally implanted devices and is not a consequence of stretching, device migration, vasospasm, and so forth. A direct, linear, statistically significant relationship exists between the degree of observed outward remodeling and the diameter of the implanted Pipeline Embolization Device relative to the target vessel. Overall, remodeled arterial diameters were reduced by 15% (SD, 10%) relative to baseline and followed a normal distribution. Clinically relevant stenosis was not observed. Conclusions: Vessel healing involves both outward remodeling and neointimal overgrowth. Judicial oversizing could be useful in specific settings to counter the reduction in lumen diameter due to postimplant neointimal overgrowth; however, this overszing needs to be balanced against the decrease in metal coverage accompanying the use of oversized devices. Similar analysis for other devices is essential.