Risk factors for the persistence of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms treated with flow diverters

Risk factors for the persistence of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms treated with flow diverters | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Risk factors for the persistence of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms treated with flow diverters Jiangli Han, Xiaobo Li, Hao Niu, Long Lin, Aihua Liu, Ying Xia This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Apr, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted 13 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Flow diverters (FDs) have been employed in the treatment of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms (IVADAs), yielding seemingly favorable outcomes. However, a subset of patients continues to experience aneurysm persistence after FD treatment, which may predispose them to recurrent symptoms or complications. This study aims to explore the risk factors associated with the persistence of unruptured IVADAs that have undergone treatment with FDs. The study encompassed 77 unruptured IVADAs from 75 consecutive patients who received treatment with FDs. At a median follow-up of 13 months, 31.2% (24/77) of IVADAs exhibited persistence. Upon multivariate logistic regression analysis, significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation (odds ratio [OR] 17.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01–144.24, p = 0.009) and posterior inferior cerebellar artery involvement (OR 7.06, 95% CI 1.40–35.50, p = 0.018) were independently associated with aneurysm persistence; while follow-up duration (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.97, p = 0.005) was adversely associated with aneurysm persistence. Significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and posterior inferior cerebellar artery involvement could serve as independent risk factors contributing to the persistence of unruptured IVADAs after FD treatment. Biological sciences/Neuroscience Health sciences/Neurology dissecting aneurysm flow diverter stenosis therapeutic occlusion vertebral artery INTRODUCTION Intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms (IVADAs) are an important cause of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and posterior circulation ischemia in young and middle-aged people 1 . Endovascular treatment has been accepted as the mainstream approach for preventing SAH and ischemic stroke in patients with IVADAs 2 – 9 . In recent years, the practice of flow diverters (FDs) has been extended to unruptured IVADAs with favorable outcomes 4 , 6 , 10 – 14 . However, IVADAs may persist after flow diversion, potentially leading to delayed rupture or an increased mass effect 15 . Understanding the risk factors contributing to this phenomenon is crucial for optimizing patient selection and treatment strategies. This study aims to identify the risk factors associated with the persistence of unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs. By examining clinical, morphological, and procedural variables, we seek to elucidate the underlying mechanisms that may influence treatment efficacy. METHODS This study received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Tiantan Hospital (KY 2021-038-02), which waived the requirement for informed consent from patients due to the retrospective nature of the study design. All procedures were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Patients This study received approval from the Institutional Review Board. It retrospectively analyzed a consecutive series of patients with unruptured IVADAs who underwent treatment with first-ever FDs at Beijing Tiantan Hospital (Beijing, China) from January 2016 to February 2021. The diagnosis of IVADAs was based on clinical manifestations and radiological findings obtained either from three-dimensional digital subtraction angiography (3D-DSA) alone or 3D-DSA combined with CT angiography, MR angiography, and/or high- resolution MRI. Inclusion criteria were: (1) unruptured IVADAs with or without clinical manifestations, including posterior circulation ischemia and mass effect; (2) dissecting aneurysms involving but not limited to the V4 segment of the vertebral artery (VA); and (3) first-ever treated with FDs. The exclusion criteria were: (1) VA dilatation and/or stenosis without the signs of dissection, including a double lumen, intimal flap, or intramural hematoma; (2) previous history of surgical or endovascular treatment; (3) ruptured IVADAs; and (4) lack of follow-up data. Clinical data included age, sex, current smoking (within the past 6 months), hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and pre-procedural modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores > 2. Morphological characteristics All the morphological characteristics were well evaluated by using 3D-DSA images from a Siemens Artis Zee System (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany), which included dominant VA, significant stenosis, the entirely involved circumference, posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) involvement, basilar artery (BA) involvement, and maximum diameter. Two experienced researchers blinded to the patient’s clinical information independently interpreted the images and made consensus decisions. These morphological characteristics were defined as documented in previous studies 16 , 17 . Significant stenosis was defined as 50–99% stenosis of the parent artery adjacent to the aneurysmal dilatation. Treatment protocol Treatment protocol FDs used in this study were the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED; Medtronic, Irvine, CA, USA) and the Tubridge flow diverter (TFD; MicroPort, Shanghai, China). Before endovascular treatment, the neurointervention team discussed each case. Before the procedure, patients diagnosed with unruptured IVADAs were administered dual antiplatelet therapy, which included 100 mg of aspirin and 75 mg of clopidogrel daily for a period of 5 days. After the procedure, this regimen was maintained for an additional 6 months. The patients' responses to aspirin and clopidogrel were evaluated. In instances where hyporesponsiveness to clopidogrel was identified, ticagrelor was introduced as an alternative. Upon completion of the dual antiplatelet therapy, a maintenance regimen of 100 mg of aspirin daily was advised for a further 6 to 9 months. Endovascular treatment was performed transfemorally when patients were under general anesthesia. Heparin was administered when the FDs were ready for deployment. The entire dissecting segment of the parent artery, including stenosis, was reconstructed. We tried reconstructing the involved segment of the parent artery with a single FD. Multiple FDs were considered when the involved segment was too long to be reconstructed by a single one. Coiling in conjunction with FD placement was selected for some giant IVADAs or complex IVADAs with both fusiform and saccular components. Balloon dilation was chosen for significant stenosis within the dissecting segment of the parent artery to ensure that the degree of stenosis after FD deployment was less than 50%. Immediate occlusion status We classified immediate occlusion status into complete and incomplete occlusion. Two experienced researchers blinded to clinical information independently interpreted the immediate occlusion status and achieved a consensus. Radiological and clinical follow-up The follow-up angiography included 3D-DSA, CT angiography, and MR angiography, preferably 3D-DSA. The first follow-up angiography was often scheduled between 3 to 6 months after endovascular treatment. Subsequent follow-up was conducted every 6 to 12 months. Follow-up occlusion status was classified into complete or incomplete occlusion. Aneurysm persistence was defined as incomplete occlusion ever since FD treatment. Two experienced researchers, blinded to clinical information, independently assessed the occlusion status and subsequently reached a final consensus. The final clinical outcome was assessed using an mRS. The favorable clinical outcome was defined as mRS 0–2. Statistical analysis Continuous variables are reported as median values along with the interquartile range (IQR), while categorical variables are expressed as frequency and percentage. The normality of the distribution for continuous variables was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. To compare continuous variables, the Mann-Whitney U test was utilized. For categorical variables, either Pearson’s Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test was conducted. Inter-observer agreement regarding the interpretation of IVADA morphological characteristics and immediate or follow-up occlusion status was evaluated. Cohen’s κ coefficient was employed to assess inter-observer agreement in interpreting qualitative characteristics, whereas the intraclass correlation coefficient was utilized for quantitative characteristics. An agreement represented by Cohen’s κ coefficient or intraclass correlation coefficient greater than 0.75 was deemed excellent. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were employed to explore the variables associated with aneurysm persistence. Significant variables (p < 0.10) identified in univariate analyses were included in the multivariate logistic regression model. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA), with two-tailed p-values of less than 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS Clinical and morphological characteristics A total of 77 unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs for 75 patients were included in this study. There were 61 (79.2%) men and 16 (20.8%) women, with a median age of 53 years (age range interval 10–70 years). The median maximum diameter of IVADAs was 10.8 mm. The baseline characteristics of all the patients are shown in Table 1 . Interobserver agreement of the measurements of all the morphological parameters was considered excellent. Cohen κ coefficients for dominant VA, significant stenosis, BA involvement, entirely involved circumference, and PICA involvement were 0.842, 0.885, 1.000, 0.870, and 0.964, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient for maximum diameter was 0.970. Hypertension was less prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (37.5% vs 62.3%, p = 0.043). Pre-procedural significant stenosis was more prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (25.0% vs 5.7%, p = 0.023). While PICA involvement was more prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (37.5% vs 17.0%, p = 0.049). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to age, sex, smoking, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, pre-procedural mRS > 2, dominant VA, BA involvement, entirely involved circumference, or maximum diameter. Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients Characteristic Overall (n = 77) Complete occlusion group (n = 53) Persistence group (n = 24) P -value Age, median (IQR), year 53 (47–58) 53 (47–58) 53 (47–58) 0.978 Sex, male, n (%) 61 (79.2) 41 (77.4) 20 (83.3) 0.549 Smoking, n (%) 26 (33.8) 17 (32.1) 9 (37.5) 0.641 Hypertension, n (%) 42 (54.5) 33 (62.3) 9 (37.5) 0.043 Hyperlipidemia, n (%) 21 (27.3) 16 (30.2) 5 (20.8) 0.393 Diabetes mellitus, n (%) 10 (13.0) 6 (11.3) 4 (16.7) 0.493 Coronary artery disease, n (%) 3 (3.9) 3 (5.7) 0 (0.0) 0.548 Pre-procedural mRS > 2, n (%) 3 (3.9) 3 (5.7) 0 (0.0) 0.548 Dominant VA, n (%) * 54 (70.1) 37 (69.8) 17 (70.8) 0.877 Significant stenosis, n (%) 9 (13.0) 3 (7.5) 6 (25.0) 0.023 BA involvement, n (%) 3 (3.9) 1 (1.9) 2 (8.3) 0.228 Entirely involved circumference, n (%) 40 (51.9) 25 (47.2) 15 (62.5) 0.212 PICA involvement, n (%) 18 (23.4) 9 (17.0) 9 (37.5) 0.049 Maximum diameter, median (IQR), mm 10.8 (9.0–14.6) 11.1 (9.0–14.6) 9.9 (8.9–14.7) 0.708 * There are 2 missing data points. BA, basilar artery; IQR, interquartile range; mRS, modified Rankin Scale; PICA, posterior inferior cerebellar artery; SAH, subarachnoid hemorrhage; VA, vertebral artery. Treatment selection and results All 77 procedures were successfully performed. Multiple FDs and conjunction with coils were used in 9.1% (7/77) and 13.0% (10/77) of the IVADAs, respectively. Immediate complete occlusion was achieved in 5.2% (4/77) of the IVADAs. The overall median follow-up duration of patients was 13 months. By the final follow-up, 31.2% (24/77) of the IVADAs showed persistent filling, which included one case of recanalization that had initially presented as incomplete occlusion. Cohen κ coefficient for complete occlusion was 0.941. The rate of mRS 0–2 was 98.7% (76/77). A comparison of treatment selection and results are shown in Table 2 . The median follow-up duration was significantly longer in the complete occlusion group than in the persistence group (19 vs 7 months, p < 0.001). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to multiple FDs, conjunction with coils, immediate complete occlusion, or mRS 0–2. Table 2 Treatment selection and results of 77 patients Variable Overall (n = 77) Complete occlusion group (n = 53) Persistence group (n = 24) P -value Multiple FDs, n (%) 7 (9.1) 4 (7.5) 3 (12.5) 0.671 Conjunction with coils, n (%) 10 (13.0) 8 (15.1) 2 (8.3) 0.716 Immediate complete occlusion, n (%) 4 (5.2) 4 (7.5) 0 (0.0) 0.304 Follow-up duration, median (IQR), months 13 (7–32) 19 (10–34) 7 (5–12) .999 FDs, flow diverters; IQR, interquartile range; mRS, modified Rankin Scale. Variables associated with aneurysm persistence The results of univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for aneurysm persistence are shown in Table 3 . In univariate analyses, hypertension, significant stenosis, PICA involvement, and follow-up duration were significant variables (p < 0.10). Upon multivariate regression analysis, significant stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation (OR 17.02, 95% CI 2.01–144.24, p = 0.009) and PICA involvement (OR 7.06, 95% CI 1.40–35.50, p = 0.018) were independently associated with aneurysm persistence; while follow-up duration (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.97, p = 0.005) was adversely associated with aneurysm persistence. Table 3 Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for the persistence of IVADAs treated with flow diverters Variable Univariate Multivariate OR (95% CI) P -value OR (95% CI) P -value Hypertension 0.36 (0.13–0.98) 0.046 0.27 (0.06–1.19) 0.085 Significant stenosis 5.56 (1.26–24.58) 0.024 17.02 (2.01–144.24) 0.009 PICA involvement 2.93 (0.98–8.76) 0.054 7.06 (1.40–35.50) 0.018 Follow-up duration 0.92 (0.87–0.97) 0.003 0.91 (0.84–0.97) 0.005 CI, confidence interval; IVADAs, intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms; OR, odds ratio; PICA, posterior inferior cerebellar artery. DISCUSSION In this study, we investigated the risk factors for the persistence of unruptured IVADAs following FD treatment. Our findings indicated that significant stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and PICA involvement are independent risk factors for aneurysm persistence. Conversely, a longer duration of follow-up serves as an independent protective factor against aneurysm persistence. A stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation is common in IVADAs 18 . A previous study reported that parent artery stenosis could cause inadequate opening and poor apposition of FDs in the stenosis regions when treating anterior circulation non-dissecting aneurysms 19 . Another study indicated that stenosis > 50% of the parent artery next to the aneurysm restricted the opening of FDs and caused malapposition; at the median follow-up of 5.5 months, pre-procedural stenosis tended to be associated with incomplete aneurysmal occlusion 20 . We hypothesize that this mechanism may also account for persistent filling of IVADAs after flow diversion. We suggest that significant stenosis adjacent to the aneurysmal dilation is likely to result in inadequate apposition of FDs. Furthermore, smaller FDs may be preferentially chosen for IVADAs with significant stenosis to enhance deployment maneuverability and minimize the risk of arterial injury associated with balloon dilation. As traditional stents that are smaller than the vessel diameter can cause malapposition 21 . the use of smaller FDs may similarly contribute to malapposition. After flow diversion, the endothelialization of FDs begins at the interface with the arterial wall. This initial process establishes a cellular substrate that promotes the subsequent endothelialization of areas of the FDs not directly in contact with the artery wall 22 . Consequently, malapposition of FDs can hinder endothelialization by decreasing the contact interface with the arterial wall, potentially leading to the persistence of aneurysms 19 , 23 – 25 . The PICA is a crucial branch of the VA, and preserving its patency is essential during the endovascular treatment of IVADAs. Occlusion of the PICA can result in significant neurological deficits due to impaired blood flow to the cerebellum and brainstem. FDs facilitate the maintenance of the patency of covered branch arteries. However, when a branch artery is incorporated into the target aneurysm, its blood flow may continue to contribute to the aneurysm's persistent filling, which can lead to incomplete occlusion despite the implementation of flow diversion techniques 15 . Previous studies have extensively documented the presence of aneurysms with incorporated branches, suggesting that these features may be the most significant contributor to persistent aneurysm filling after flow diversion 26 . However, the association between PICA involvement and persistent filling of IVADAs following flow diversion has not been well explored. Our findings indicate that PICA involvement is an independent risk factor for the persistent filling of IVADAs after flow diversion. This phenomenon underscores the importance of careful preoperative imaging and planning to assess the involvement of PICA in the IVADAs. A prior study investigating flow diversion for the treatment of posterior circulation cerebral aneurysms reported a complete occlusion rate of 68% at six months, which increased to 78% at twelve months 27 . Additionally, a systematic review on predictors of aneurysm occlusion following FD treatment found that longer follow-up durations were associated with complete occlusion 28 . In our study, the duration of follow-up also demonstrated a predictive effect on the occlusion of IVADAs, aligning with findings from prior research 27 , 28 . We propose that two mechanisms may elucidate this phenomenon: (1) following flow diversion treatment, the endothelialization of areas of the FDs not directly in contact with the arterial wall improves over the follow-up period 22 ; and (2) once complete occlusion of the aneurysm is achieved after flow diversion treatment, the likelihood of recurrence is minimal 29 , 30 . Several limitations of our study should be acknowledged. First, the retrospective single-center design may have introduced potential bias. Second, we did not assess the association between malapposition and the persistence of IVADAs. Third, the tortuosity or curvature of the parent artery was not analyzed, which could represent a confounding factor. Additionally, the relatively small number of cases exhibiting immediate complete occlusion and those involving the use of additional coils may have limited our ability to detect significant correlations with aneurysm occlusion outcomes during the follow-up period. This limitation indicates that a larger dataset is necessary to draw more definitive conclusions. We identified significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and PICA involvement as potential independent risk factors for the persistence of unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs. These findings may facilitate the prediction of radiological outcomes for unruptured IVADAs following flow diversion and inform the development of strategies aimed at promoting aneurysm occlusion. Declarations Author Contribution J.H. conceptualized and designed the study; collected, analyzed, and interpreted the data; and drafted the manuscript. X.L. interpreted the data. H.N. and L.L. collected the data. A.L. and Y.X. conceptualized, designed and supervised the study, and revised the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript. Data Availability The corresponding author can be contacted for inquiries, and anonymized data will be made available upon reasonable request from any qualified investigator. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.L. or Y.X. References Arnold, M. et al. Vertebral artery dissection: presenting findings and predictors of outcome. Stroke . 37 , 2499–2503. https://doi.org:10.1161/01.STR.0000240493.88473.39 (2006). Yoon, W. et al. Dissection of the V4 segment of the vertebral artery: clinicoradiologic manifestations and endovascular treatment. Eur. Radiol. 17 , 983–993. https://doi.org:10.1007/s00330-006-0272-8 (2007). Kim, B. M. et al. Incidence and risk factors of recurrence after endovascular treatment of intracranial vertebrobasilar dissecting aneurysms. Stroke . 42 , 2425–2430. https://doi.org:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.617381 (2011). Kuhn, A. L. et al. Endovascular reconstruction of unruptured intradural vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device. J. Neurointerv Surg. 8 , 1048–1051. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012028 (2016). Guan, J. et al. Endovascular treatment for ruptured and unruptured vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a meta-analysis. J. Neurointerv Surg. 9 , 558–563. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012309 (2017). Cerejo, R. et al. Flow diverter treatment of intracranial vertebral artery dissecting pseudoaneurysms. J. Neurointerv Surg. 9 , 1064–1068. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013020 (2017). Wang, K. et al. Risk Factors of Recurrence after Stent(s)-Assisted Coiling of Intracranial Vertebrobasilar Dissecting Aneurysms: A Multicenter Study. Front. Neurol. 8 , 482. https://doi.org:10.3389/fneur.2017.00482 (2017). Tanoue, S. et al. Delineability and anatomical variations of perforating arteries from normal vertebral artery on 3D DSA: implications for endovascular treatment of dissecting aneurysms. Neuroradiology . 63 , 609–617. https://doi.org:10.1007/s00234-020-02549-y (2021). Aihara, M. et al. Predictive factors of medullary infarction after endovascular internal trapping using coils for vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. J. Neurosurg. 129 , 107–113. https://doi.org:10.3171/2017.2.JNS162916 (2018). Bhogal, P. et al. Treatment of posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms with flow diverters: a single-center experience and review of 56 patients. J. Neurointerv Surg. 9 , 471–481. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012781 (2017). Kan, P., Sweid, A., Srivatsan, A. & Jabbour, P. Expanding Indications for Flow Diverters: Ruptured Aneurysms, Blister Aneurysms, and Dissecting Aneurysms. Neurosurgery 86, S96-S103 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyz304 Catapano, J. S. et al. Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a 20-year institutional experience. J. Neurointerv Surg. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089 (2021). Fang, Y. B. et al. Long-Term Outcome of Tubridge Flow Diverter(S) in Treating Large Vertebral Artery Dissecting Aneurysms-A Pilot Study. Clin. Neuroradiol. 27 , 345–350. https://doi.org:10.1007/s00062-015-0494-8 (2017). Lee, W. et al. Flow diverter for the treatment of large (> 10 mm) vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. Acta Neurochir. (Wien) . 164 , 1247–1254. https://doi.org:10.1007/s00701-021-04965-2 (2022). Shapiro, M., Becske, T. & Nelson, P. K. Learning from failure: persistence of aneurysms following pipeline embolization. J. Neurosurg. 126 , 578–585. https://doi.org:10.3171/2015.12.JNS152065 (2017). Hong, J. M. et al. Vertebral artery dominance contributes to basilar artery curvature and peri-vertebrobasilar junctional infarcts. J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry . 80 , 1087–1092. https://doi.org:10.1136/jnnp.2008.169805 (2009). Han, J. et al. Morphological characteristics associated with ruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. J. Neurointerv Surg. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744 (2022). Han, J. et al. Morphological characteristics associated with ruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. J. Neurointerv Surg. 15 , 321–324. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744 (2023). Cherian, J. et al. Balloon-Mounted Stents for Treatment of Refractory Flow Diverting Device Wall Malapposition. Oper. Neurosurg. (Hagerstown) . 19 , 37–42. https://doi.org:10.1093/ons/opz297 (2020). Liang, F. et al. Use of Pipeline Embolization Device for Posterior Circulation Aneurysms: Single-Center Experiences with Comparison with Anterior Circulation Aneurysms. World Neurosurg. 112 , e683–e690. https://doi.org:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.129 (2018). Attizzani, G. F., Capodanno, D., Ohno, Y. & Tamburino, C. Mechanisms, pathophysiology, and clinical aspects of incomplete stent apposition. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 63 , 1355–1367. https://doi.org:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.019 (2014). Kadirvel, R. et al. Cellular mechanisms of aneurysm occlusion after treatment with a flow diverter. Radiology . 270 , 394–399. https://doi.org:10.1148/radiol.13130796 (2014). Rouchaud, A. et al. Wall Apposition Is a Key Factor for Aneurysm Occlusion after Flow Diversion: A Histologic Evaluation in 41 Rabbits. AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol. 37 , 2087–2091. https://doi.org:10.3174/ajnr.A4848 (2016). Panchendrabose, K., Muram, S. & Mitha, A. P. Promoting endothelialization of flow-diverting stents: a review. J. Neurointerv Surg. 13 , 86–90. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015874 (2021). King, R. M. et al. Communicating malapposition of flow diverters assessed with optical coherence tomography correlates with delayed aneurysm occlusion. J. Neurointerv Surg. 10 , 693–697. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013502 (2018). Dong, L. et al. Predicting Persistent Aneurysm Filling After Pipeline Embolization Device Treatment in Patients with Intracranial Aneurysm: Development and External Validation of a Nomogram Model. Transl Stroke Res. https://doi.org:10.1007/s12975-023-01222-9 (2023). Bender, M. T. et al. Flow Diversion of Posterior Circulation Cerebral Aneurysms: A Single-Institution Series of 59 Cases. Neurosurgery . 84 , 206–216. https://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyy076 (2019). Meyer, L. et al. Predictors of aneurysm occlusion after treatment with flow diverters: a systematic literature review. J. Neurointerv Surg. 16 , 482–490. https://doi.org:10.1136/jnis-2022-019993 (2024). Catapano, J. S. et al. Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a 20-year institutional experience. J. Neurointerv Surg. 14 , 257–261. https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089 (2022). Chua, M. M. J. et al. Flow diversion for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: Mechanism and implications. Ann. Neurol. 85 , 793–800. https://doi.org:10.1002/ana.25484 (2019). Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 21 Apr, 2025 Read the published version in Scientific Reports → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 04 Mar, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 08 Feb, 2025 Reviews received at journal 07 Feb, 2025 Reviewers agreed at journal 07 Feb, 2025 Reviews received at journal 26 Nov, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Nov, 2024 Reviews received at journal 04 Nov, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 03 Nov, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 03 Nov, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 03 Nov, 2024 Editor invited by journal 25 Oct, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 25 Oct, 2024 First submitted to journal 24 Oct, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5323882","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":374072114,"identity":"8b0a62f1-5210-4335-a37d-2ab5a0b8f6bc","order_by":0,"name":"Jiangli Han","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Affiliated Haikou Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jiangli","middleName":"","lastName":"Han","suffix":""},{"id":374072115,"identity":"dc057545-3e7f-447b-a3cb-48a7c71c4da5","order_by":1,"name":"Xiaobo Li","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Affiliated Haikou Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xiaobo","middleName":"","lastName":"Li","suffix":""},{"id":374072116,"identity":"0014180e-abfd-4896-9015-bb7369536945","order_by":2,"name":"Hao Niu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Beijing Tiantan Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hao","middleName":"","lastName":"Niu","suffix":""},{"id":374072117,"identity":"10fbb1e7-e263-404c-b4c0-29186b2233d5","order_by":3,"name":"Long Lin","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Affiliated Haikou Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Long","middleName":"","lastName":"Lin","suffix":""},{"id":374072118,"identity":"fa2b2fdb-8362-411e-b30f-62a4f6bb3401","order_by":4,"name":"Aihua Liu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Beijing Tiantan Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Aihua","middleName":"","lastName":"Liu","suffix":""},{"id":374072122,"identity":"fa67dcfd-1d0d-4a07-a113-47cf3fe527de","order_by":5,"name":"Ying Xia","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Affiliated Haikou Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ying","middleName":"","lastName":"Xia","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-10-24 08:08:22","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98737-y","type":"published","date":"2025-04-21T15:57:47+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81569646,"identity":"c1fee22a-6eec-4b5e-8496-a7c5e8cb077a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-28 16:09:20","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":682728,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5323882/v1/7dafa940-117a-43af-b639-843195f3f391.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Risk factors for the persistence of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms treated with flow diverters","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eIntracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms (IVADAs) are an important cause of subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) and posterior circulation ischemia in young and middle-aged people\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Endovascular treatment has been accepted as the mainstream approach for preventing SAH and ischemic stroke in patients with IVADAs\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR3 CR4 CR5 CR6 CR7 CR8\" citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In recent years, the practice of flow diverters (FDs) has been extended to unruptured IVADAs with favorable outcomes\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR11 CR12 CR13\" citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, IVADAs may persist after flow diversion, potentially leading to delayed rupture or an increased mass effect\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the risk factors contributing to this phenomenon is crucial for optimizing patient selection and treatment strategies. This study aims to identify the risk factors associated with the persistence of unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs. By examining clinical, morphological, and procedural variables, we seek to elucidate the underlying mechanisms that may influence treatment efficacy.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"METHODS","content":"\u003cp\u003e This study received approval from the Institutional Review Board of Beijing Tiantan Hospital (KY 2021-038-02), which waived the requirement for informed consent from patients due to the retrospective nature of the study design. All procedures were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePatients\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study received approval from the Institutional Review Board. It retrospectively analyzed a consecutive series of patients with unruptured IVADAs who underwent treatment with first-ever FDs at Beijing Tiantan Hospital (Beijing, China) from January 2016 to February 2021. The diagnosis of IVADAs was based on clinical manifestations and radiological findings obtained either from three-dimensional digital subtraction angiography (3D-DSA) alone or 3D-DSA combined with CT angiography, MR angiography, and/or high- resolution MRI. Inclusion criteria were: (1) unruptured IVADAs with or without clinical manifestations, including posterior circulation ischemia and mass effect; (2) dissecting aneurysms involving but not limited to the V4 segment of the vertebral artery (VA); and (3) first-ever treated with FDs. The exclusion criteria were: (1) VA dilatation and/or stenosis without the signs of dissection, including a double lumen, intimal flap, or intramural hematoma; (2) previous history of surgical or endovascular treatment; (3) ruptured IVADAs; and (4) lack of follow-up data. Clinical data included age, sex, current smoking (within the past 6 months), hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, and pre-procedural modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eMorphological characteristics\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll the morphological characteristics were well evaluated by using 3D-DSA images from a Siemens Artis Zee System (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany), which included dominant VA, significant stenosis, the entirely involved circumference, posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) involvement, basilar artery (BA) involvement, and maximum diameter. Two experienced researchers blinded to the patient\u0026rsquo;s clinical information independently interpreted the images and made consensus decisions. These morphological characteristics were defined as documented in previous studies\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Significant stenosis was defined as 50\u0026ndash;99% stenosis of the parent artery adjacent to the aneurysmal dilatation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eTreatment protocol\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cdiv class=\"Heading\"\u003eTreatment protocol\u003c/div\u003e \u003cp\u003eFDs used in this study were the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED; Medtronic, Irvine, CA, USA) and the Tubridge flow diverter (TFD; MicroPort, Shanghai, China). Before endovascular treatment, the neurointervention team discussed each case.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore the procedure, patients diagnosed with unruptured IVADAs were administered dual antiplatelet therapy, which included 100 mg of aspirin and 75 mg of clopidogrel daily for a period of 5 days. After the procedure, this regimen was maintained for an additional 6 months. The patients' responses to aspirin and clopidogrel were evaluated. In instances where hyporesponsiveness to clopidogrel was identified, ticagrelor was introduced as an alternative. Upon completion of the dual antiplatelet therapy, a maintenance regimen of 100 mg of aspirin daily was advised for a further 6 to 9 months.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eEndovascular treatment was performed transfemorally when patients were under general anesthesia. Heparin was administered when the FDs were ready for deployment. The entire dissecting segment of the parent artery, including stenosis, was reconstructed. We tried reconstructing the involved segment of the parent artery with a single FD. Multiple FDs were considered when the involved segment was too long to be reconstructed by a single one. Coiling in conjunction with FD placement was selected for some giant IVADAs or complex IVADAs with both fusiform and saccular components. Balloon dilation was chosen for significant stenosis within the dissecting segment of the parent artery to ensure that the degree of stenosis after FD deployment was less than 50%.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eImmediate occlusion status\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe classified immediate occlusion status into complete and incomplete occlusion. Two experienced researchers blinded to clinical information independently interpreted the immediate occlusion status and achieved a consensus.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eRadiological and clinical follow-up\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe follow-up angiography included 3D-DSA, CT angiography, and MR angiography, preferably 3D-DSA. The first follow-up angiography was often scheduled between 3 to 6 months after endovascular treatment. Subsequent follow-up was conducted every 6 to 12 months. Follow-up occlusion status was classified into complete or incomplete occlusion. Aneurysm persistence was defined as incomplete occlusion ever since FD treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwo experienced researchers, blinded to clinical information, independently assessed the occlusion status and subsequently reached a final consensus. The final clinical outcome was assessed using an mRS. The favorable clinical outcome was defined as mRS 0\u0026ndash;2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eContinuous variables are reported as median values along with the interquartile range (IQR), while categorical variables are expressed as frequency and percentage. The normality of the distribution for continuous variables was assessed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. To compare continuous variables, the Mann-Whitney \u003cem\u003eU\u003c/em\u003e test was utilized. For categorical variables, either Pearson\u0026rsquo;s Chi-squared test or Fisher\u0026rsquo;s exact test was conducted. Inter-observer agreement regarding the interpretation of IVADA morphological characteristics and immediate or follow-up occlusion status was evaluated. Cohen\u0026rsquo;s κ coefficient was employed to assess inter-observer agreement in interpreting qualitative characteristics, whereas the intraclass correlation coefficient was utilized for quantitative characteristics. An agreement represented by Cohen\u0026rsquo;s κ coefficient or intraclass correlation coefficient greater than 0.75 was deemed excellent. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were employed to explore the variables associated with aneurysm persistence. Significant variables (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10) identified in univariate analyses were included in the multivariate logistic regression model. Results are presented as odds ratios (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA), with two-tailed p-values of less than 0.05 considered statistically significant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"RESULTS","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eClinical and morphological characteristics\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eA total of 77 unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs for 75 patients were included in this study. There were 61 (79.2%) men and 16 (20.8%) women, with a median age of 53 years (age range interval 10\u0026ndash;70 years). The median maximum diameter of IVADAs was 10.8 mm. The baseline characteristics of all the patients are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. Interobserver agreement of the measurements of all the morphological parameters was considered excellent. Cohen κ coefficients for dominant VA, significant stenosis, BA involvement, entirely involved circumference, and PICA involvement were 0.842, 0.885, 1.000, 0.870, and 0.964, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient for maximum diameter was 0.970. Hypertension was less prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (37.5% vs 62.3%, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.043). Pre-procedural significant stenosis was more prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (25.0% vs 5.7%, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.023). While PICA involvement was more prevalent in the persistence group than in the complete occlusion group (37.5% vs 17.0%, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.049). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to age, sex, smoking, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, pre-procedural mRS\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2, dominant VA, BA involvement, entirely involved circumference, or maximum diameter.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eBaseline characteristics of patients\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCharacteristic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;77)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComplete occlusion group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersistence group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;24)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAge, median (IQR), year\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53 (47\u0026ndash;58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53 (47\u0026ndash;58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53 (47\u0026ndash;58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.978\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSex, male, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61 (79.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e41 (77.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20 (83.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.549\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSmoking, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26 (33.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17 (32.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (37.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.641\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHypertension, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42 (54.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33 (62.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (37.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.043\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHyperlipidemia, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21 (27.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16 (30.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5 (20.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.393\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiabetes mellitus, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (13.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6 (11.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 (16.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.493\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCoronary artery disease, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (3.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (5.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.548\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-procedural mRS\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;2, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (3.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (5.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.548\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDominant VA, n (%)\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54 (70.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37 (69.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17 (70.8)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.877\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificant stenosis, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (13.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (7.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6 (25.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.023\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBA involvement, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (3.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1 (1.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 (8.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.228\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEntirely involved circumference, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40 (51.9)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25 (47.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15 (62.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePICA involvement, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18 (23.4)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (17.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9 (37.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.049\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaximum diameter, median (IQR), mm\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.8 (9.0\u0026ndash;14.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.1 (9.0\u0026ndash;14.6)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.9 (8.9\u0026ndash;14.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.708\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eThere are 2 missing data points.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eBA, basilar artery; IQR, interquartile range; mRS, modified Rankin Scale; PICA, posterior inferior cerebellar artery; SAH, subarachnoid hemorrhage; VA, vertebral artery.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTreatment selection and results\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll 77 procedures were successfully performed. Multiple FDs and conjunction with coils were used in 9.1% (7/77) and 13.0% (10/77) of the IVADAs, respectively. Immediate complete occlusion was achieved in 5.2% (4/77) of the IVADAs. The overall median follow-up duration of patients was 13 months. By the final follow-up, 31.2% (24/77) of the IVADAs showed persistent filling, which included one case of recanalization that had initially presented as incomplete occlusion. Cohen κ coefficient for complete occlusion was 0.941. The rate of mRS 0\u0026ndash;2 was 98.7% (76/77).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA comparison of treatment selection and results are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e. The median follow-up duration was significantly longer in the complete occlusion group than in the persistence group (19 vs 7 months, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001). There were no significant between-group differences with respect to multiple FDs, conjunction with coils, immediate complete occlusion, or mRS 0\u0026ndash;2.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment selection and results of 77 patients\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverall (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;77)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eComplete occlusion group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;53)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePersistence group (n\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;24)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultiple FDs, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 (9.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 (7.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3 (12.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConjunction with coils, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10 (13.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8 (15.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2 (8.3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.716\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImmediate complete occlusion, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 (5.2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4 (7.5)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0 (0.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.304\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollow-up duration, median (IQR), months\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13 (7\u0026ndash;32)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19 (10\u0026ndash;34)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7 (5\u0026ndash;12)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollow-up mRS 0\u0026ndash;2, n (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e76 (98.7)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52 (98.1)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24 (100.0)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;.999\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eFDs, flow diverters; IQR, interquartile range; mRS, modified Rankin Scale.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eVariables associated with aneurysm persistence\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for aneurysm persistence are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. In univariate analyses, hypertension, significant stenosis, PICA involvement, and follow-up duration were significant variables (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.10). Upon multivariate regression analysis, significant stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation (OR 17.02, 95% CI 2.01\u0026ndash;144.24, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.009) and PICA involvement (OR 7.06, 95% CI 1.40\u0026ndash;35.50, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.018) were independently associated with aneurysm persistence; while follow-up duration (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84\u0026ndash;0.97, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.005) was adversely associated with aneurysm persistence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses for the persistence of IVADAs treated with flow diverters\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVariable\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c3\" namest=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnivariate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMultivariate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOR (95% CI)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e-value\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHypertension\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.36 (0.13\u0026ndash;0.98)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.046\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.27 (0.06\u0026ndash;1.19)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.085\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSignificant stenosis\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.56 (1.26\u0026ndash;24.58)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.02 (2.01\u0026ndash;144.24)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.009\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePICA involvement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.93 (0.98\u0026ndash;8.76)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.054\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.06 (1.40\u0026ndash;35.50)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.018\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFollow-up duration\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.92 (0.87\u0026ndash;0.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.91 (0.84\u0026ndash;0.97)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.005\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"6\"\u003eCI, confidence interval; IVADAs, intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms; OR, odds ratio; PICA, posterior inferior cerebellar artery.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, we investigated the risk factors for the persistence of unruptured IVADAs following FD treatment. Our findings indicated that significant stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and PICA involvement are independent risk factors for aneurysm persistence. Conversely, a longer duration of follow-up serves as an independent protective factor against aneurysm persistence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation is common in IVADAs\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. A previous study reported that parent artery stenosis could cause inadequate opening and poor apposition of FDs in the stenosis regions when treating anterior circulation non-dissecting aneurysms\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Another study indicated that stenosis\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;50% of the parent artery next to the aneurysm restricted the opening of FDs and caused malapposition; at the median follow-up of 5.5 months, pre-procedural stenosis tended to be associated with incomplete aneurysmal occlusion\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. We hypothesize that this mechanism may also account for persistent filling of IVADAs after flow diversion. We suggest that significant stenosis adjacent to the aneurysmal dilation is likely to result in inadequate apposition of FDs. Furthermore, smaller FDs may be preferentially chosen for IVADAs with significant stenosis to enhance deployment maneuverability and minimize the risk of arterial injury associated with balloon dilation. As traditional stents that are smaller than the vessel diameter can cause malapposition\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. the use of smaller FDs may similarly contribute to malapposition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter flow diversion, the endothelialization of FDs begins at the interface with the arterial wall. This initial process establishes a cellular substrate that promotes the subsequent endothelialization of areas of the FDs not directly in contact with the artery wall\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Consequently, malapposition of FDs can hinder endothelialization by decreasing the contact interface with the arterial wall, potentially leading to the persistence of aneurysms\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR24\" citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe PICA is a crucial branch of the VA, and preserving its patency is essential during the endovascular treatment of IVADAs. Occlusion of the PICA can result in significant neurological deficits due to impaired blood flow to the cerebellum and brainstem. FDs facilitate the maintenance of the patency of covered branch arteries. However, when a branch artery is incorporated into the target aneurysm, its blood flow may continue to contribute to the aneurysm's persistent filling, which can lead to incomplete occlusion despite the implementation of flow diversion techniques\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Previous studies have extensively documented the presence of aneurysms with incorporated branches, suggesting that these features may be the most significant contributor to persistent aneurysm filling after flow diversion\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. However, the association between PICA involvement and persistent filling of IVADAs following flow diversion has not been well explored. Our findings indicate that PICA involvement is an independent risk factor for the persistent filling of IVADAs after flow diversion. This phenomenon underscores the importance of careful preoperative imaging and planning to assess the involvement of PICA in the IVADAs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA prior study investigating flow diversion for the treatment of posterior circulation cerebral aneurysms reported a complete occlusion rate of 68% at six months, which increased to 78% at twelve months\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. Additionally, a systematic review on predictors of aneurysm occlusion following FD treatment found that longer follow-up durations were associated with complete occlusion\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. In our study, the duration of follow-up also demonstrated a predictive effect on the occlusion of IVADAs, aligning with findings from prior research\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e. We propose that two mechanisms may elucidate this phenomenon: (1) following flow diversion treatment, the endothelialization of areas of the FDs not directly in contact with the arterial wall improves over the follow-up period\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; and (2) once complete occlusion of the aneurysm is achieved after flow diversion treatment, the likelihood of recurrence is minimal\u003csup\u003e\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e,\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral limitations of our study should be acknowledged. First, the retrospective single-center design may have introduced potential bias. Second, we did not assess the association between malapposition and the persistence of IVADAs. Third, the tortuosity or curvature of the parent artery was not analyzed, which could represent a confounding factor. Additionally, the relatively small number of cases exhibiting immediate complete occlusion and those involving the use of additional coils may have limited our ability to detect significant correlations with aneurysm occlusion outcomes during the follow-up period. This limitation indicates that a larger dataset is necessary to draw more definitive conclusions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe identified significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and PICA involvement as potential independent risk factors for the persistence of unruptured IVADAs treated with FDs. These findings may facilitate the prediction of radiological outcomes for unruptured IVADAs following flow diversion and inform the development of strategies aimed at promoting aneurysm occlusion.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eJ.H. conceptualized and designed the study; collected, analyzed, and interpreted the data; and drafted the manuscript. X.L. interpreted the data. H.N. and L.L. collected the data. A.L. and Y.X. conceptualized, designed and supervised the study, and revised the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe corresponding author can be contacted for inquiries, and anonymized data will be made available upon reasonable request from any qualified investigator. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to A.L. or Y.X.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eArnold, M. et al. Vertebral artery dissection: presenting findings and predictors of outcome. \u003cem\u003eStroke\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e37\u003c/b\u003e, 2499\u0026ndash;2503. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1161/01.STR.0000240493.88473.39\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1161/01.STR.0000240493.88473.39\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2006).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYoon, W. et al. Dissection of the V4 segment of the vertebral artery: clinicoradiologic manifestations and endovascular treatment. \u003cem\u003eEur. Radiol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e17\u003c/b\u003e, 983\u0026ndash;993. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1007/s00330-006-0272-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1007/s00330-006-0272-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2007).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKim, B. M. et al. Incidence and risk factors of recurrence after endovascular treatment of intracranial vertebrobasilar dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eStroke\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e42\u003c/b\u003e, 2425\u0026ndash;2430. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.617381\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.617381\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2011).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKuhn, A. L. et al. Endovascular reconstruction of unruptured intradural vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e, 1048\u0026ndash;1051. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012028\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012028\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2016).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGuan, J. et al. Endovascular treatment for ruptured and unruptured vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a meta-analysis. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e, 558\u0026ndash;563. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012309\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012309\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCerejo, R. et al. Flow diverter treatment of intracranial vertebral artery dissecting pseudoaneurysms. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e, 1064\u0026ndash;1068. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013020\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013020\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang, K. et al. Risk Factors of Recurrence after Stent(s)-Assisted Coiling of Intracranial Vertebrobasilar Dissecting Aneurysms: A Multicenter Study. \u003cem\u003eFront. Neurol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e8\u003c/b\u003e, 482. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.3389/fneur.2017.00482\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.3389/fneur.2017.00482\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTanoue, S. et al. Delineability and anatomical variations of perforating arteries from normal vertebral artery on 3D DSA: implications for endovascular treatment of dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eNeuroradiology\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e63\u003c/b\u003e, 609\u0026ndash;617. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1007/s00234-020-02549-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1007/s00234-020-02549-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAihara, M. et al. Predictive factors of medullary infarction after endovascular internal trapping using coils for vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurosurg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e129\u003c/b\u003e, 107\u0026ndash;113. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.3171/2017.2.JNS162916\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.3171/2017.2.JNS162916\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBhogal, P. et al. Treatment of posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms with flow diverters: a single-center experience and review of 56 patients. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e9\u003c/b\u003e, 471\u0026ndash;481. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012781\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012781\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKan, P., Sweid, A., Srivatsan, A. \u0026amp; Jabbour, P. Expanding Indications for Flow Diverters: Ruptured Aneurysms, Blister Aneurysms, and Dissecting Aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eNeurosurgery\u003c/em\u003e 86, S96-S103 (2020). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyz304\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyz304\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCatapano, J. S. et al. Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a 20-year institutional experience. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFang, Y. B. et al. Long-Term Outcome of Tubridge Flow Diverter(S) in Treating Large Vertebral Artery Dissecting Aneurysms-A Pilot Study. \u003cem\u003eClin. Neuroradiol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e27\u003c/b\u003e, 345\u0026ndash;350. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1007/s00062-015-0494-8\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1007/s00062-015-0494-8\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLee, W. et al. Flow diverter for the treatment of large (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;10 mm) vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eActa Neurochir. (Wien)\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e164\u003c/b\u003e, 1247\u0026ndash;1254. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1007/s00701-021-04965-2\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1007/s00701-021-04965-2\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShapiro, M., Becske, T. \u0026amp; Nelson, P. K. Learning from failure: persistence of aneurysms following pipeline embolization. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurosurg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e126\u003c/b\u003e, 578\u0026ndash;585. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.3171/2015.12.JNS152065\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.3171/2015.12.JNS152065\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2017).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHong, J. M. et al. Vertebral artery dominance contributes to basilar artery curvature and peri-vertebrobasilar junctional infarcts. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e80\u003c/b\u003e, 1087\u0026ndash;1092. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/jnnp.2008.169805\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/jnnp.2008.169805\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2009).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHan, J. et al. Morphological characteristics associated with ruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHan, J. et al. Morphological characteristics associated with ruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e15\u003c/b\u003e, 321\u0026ndash;324. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2022-018744\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCherian, J. et al. Balloon-Mounted Stents for Treatment of Refractory Flow Diverting Device Wall Malapposition. \u003cem\u003eOper. Neurosurg. (Hagerstown)\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e19\u003c/b\u003e, 37\u0026ndash;42. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1093/ons/opz297\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1093/ons/opz297\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2020).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiang, F. et al. Use of Pipeline Embolization Device for Posterior Circulation Aneurysms: Single-Center Experiences with Comparison with Anterior Circulation Aneurysms. \u003cem\u003eWorld Neurosurg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e112\u003c/b\u003e, e683\u0026ndash;e690. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.129\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.01.129\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAttizzani, G. F., Capodanno, D., Ohno, Y. \u0026amp; Tamburino, C. Mechanisms, pathophysiology, and clinical aspects of incomplete stent apposition. \u003cem\u003eJ. Am. Coll. Cardiol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e63\u003c/b\u003e, 1355\u0026ndash;1367. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.019\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.019\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKadirvel, R. et al. Cellular mechanisms of aneurysm occlusion after treatment with a flow diverter. \u003cem\u003eRadiology\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e270\u003c/b\u003e, 394\u0026ndash;399. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1148/radiol.13130796\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1148/radiol.13130796\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2014).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRouchaud, A. et al. Wall Apposition Is a Key Factor for Aneurysm Occlusion after Flow Diversion: A Histologic Evaluation in 41 Rabbits. \u003cem\u003eAJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e37\u003c/b\u003e, 2087\u0026ndash;2091. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.3174/ajnr.A4848\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.3174/ajnr.A4848\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2016).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePanchendrabose, K., Muram, S. \u0026amp; Mitha, A. P. Promoting endothelialization of flow-diverting stents: a review. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e13\u003c/b\u003e, 86\u0026ndash;90. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015874\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015874\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2021).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKing, R. M. et al. Communicating malapposition of flow diverters assessed with optical coherence tomography correlates with delayed aneurysm occlusion. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e10\u003c/b\u003e, 693\u0026ndash;697. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013502\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013502\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2018).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDong, L. et al. Predicting Persistent Aneurysm Filling After Pipeline Embolization Device Treatment in Patients with Intracranial Aneurysm: Development and External Validation of a Nomogram Model. \u003cem\u003eTransl Stroke Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1007/s12975-023-01222-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1007/s12975-023-01222-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2023).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBender, M. T. et al. Flow Diversion of Posterior Circulation Cerebral Aneurysms: A Single-Institution Series of 59 Cases. \u003cem\u003eNeurosurgery\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cb\u003e84\u003c/b\u003e, 206\u0026ndash;216. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyy076\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1093/neuros/nyy076\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMeyer, L. et al. Predictors of aneurysm occlusion after treatment with flow diverters: a systematic literature review. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e16\u003c/b\u003e, 482\u0026ndash;490. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/jnis-2022-019993\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/jnis-2022-019993\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2024).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCatapano, J. S. et al. Endovascular treatment of vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms: a 20-year institutional experience. \u003cem\u003eJ. Neurointerv Surg.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e14\u003c/b\u003e, 257\u0026ndash;261. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-017089\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2022).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChua, M. M. J. et al. Flow diversion for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: Mechanism and implications. \u003cem\u003eAnn. Neurol.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e85\u003c/b\u003e, 793\u0026ndash;800. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org:10.1002/ana.25484\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://doi.org:10.1002/ana.25484\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e (2019).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"dissecting aneurysm, flow diverter, stenosis, therapeutic occlusion, vertebral artery","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eFlow diverters (FDs) have been employed in the treatment of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms (IVADAs), yielding seemingly favorable outcomes. However, a subset of patients continues to experience aneurysm persistence after FD treatment, which may predispose them to recurrent symptoms or complications. This study aims to explore the risk factors associated with the persistence of unruptured IVADAs that have undergone treatment with FDs. The study encompassed 77 unruptured IVADAs from 75 consecutive patients who received treatment with FDs. At a median follow-up of 13 months, 31.2% (24/77) of IVADAs exhibited persistence. Upon multivariate logistic regression analysis, significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation (odds ratio [OR] 17.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.01–144.24, p = 0.009) and posterior inferior cerebellar artery involvement (OR 7.06, 95% CI 1.40–35.50, p = 0.018) were independently associated with aneurysm persistence; while follow-up duration (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.84–0.97, p = 0.005) was adversely associated with aneurysm persistence. Significant pre-procedural stenosis adjacent to aneurysmal dilatation and posterior inferior cerebellar artery involvement could serve as independent risk factors contributing to the persistence of unruptured IVADAs after FD treatment.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Risk factors for the persistence of unruptured intracranial vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms treated with flow diverters","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-11-05 10:54:36","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5323882/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2025-03-04T08:13:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"119414983499104115761927123035797423177","date":"2025-02-08T20:57:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2025-02-07T11:44:04+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"189486012135304098562918665937986078019","date":"2025-02-07T11:35:40+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-11-26T19:27:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"115354807361523242507362980487181516227","date":"2024-11-11T18:27:23+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-11-04T22:24:57+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"275911017703707580332059116072397674639","date":"2024-11-04T01:43:55+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-11-03T13:31:49+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-11-03T13:24:04+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2024-10-25T18:38:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-10-25T04:44:18+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Scientific Reports","date":"2024-10-24T08:00:46+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"scientific-reports","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"scirep","sideBox":"Learn more about [Scientific Reports](http://www.nature.com/srep/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"","title":"Scientific Reports","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Scientific Reports","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"21f85f0e-42b1-4160-9fe1-c97a35004373","owner":[],"postedDate":"November 5th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":39814173,"name":"Biological sciences/Neuroscience"},{"id":39814174,"name":"Health sciences/Neurology"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-04-28T16:02:26+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-5323882","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98737-y","journal":{"identity":"scientific-reports","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Scientific Reports"},"publishedOn":"2025-04-21 15:57:47","publishedOnDateReadable":"April 21st, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-11-05 10:54:36","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s41598-025-98737-y","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-98737-y","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5323882","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5323882","identity":"rs-5323882","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}