Safety and Efficacy of the Woven EndoBridge Device for Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Mine B,
   2. Pierot L,
   3. Lubicz B

   . Intrasaccular flow-diversion for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: the Woven EndoBridge. Expert Rev Med Devices 2014;11:315–25 doi:10.1586/17434440.2014.907741 pmid:24694000

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Moher D,
   2. Liberati A,
   3. Tetzlaff J, et al

   . Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 pmid:19621072

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Al Saiegh F,
   2. Hasan D,
   3. Mouchtouris N, et al

   . Treatment of acutely ruptured cerebral aneurysms with the Woven EndoBridge device: experience post-FDA approval. Neurosurgery 2020;87:E16–22 doi:10.1093/neuros/nyaa092 pmid:32357228

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.
   1. Behme D,
   2. Berlis A,
   3. Weber W

   . Woven EndoBridge intrasaccular flow disrupter for the treatment of ruptured and unruptured wide-neck cerebral aneurysms: report of 55 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1501–06 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4323 pmid:25953761

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.
   1. Caroff J,
   2. Mihalea C,
   3. Dargento F, et al

   . Woven Endobridge (WEB) device for endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial wide-neck aneurysms: a single-center experience. Neuroradiology 2014;56:755–61 doi:10.1007/s00234-014-1390-7 pmid:24930127

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.
   1. Clajus C,
   2. Strasilla C,
   3. Fiebig T, et al

   . Initial and mid-term results from 108 consecutive patients with cerebral aneurysms treated with the WEB device. J Neurointerv Surg 2017;9:411–17 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012276 pmid:27075486

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.
   1. Da Ros V,
   2. Bozzi A,
   3. Comelli C, et al

   . Ruptured intracranial aneurysms treated with Woven EndoBridge intrasaccular flow disruptor: a multicenter experience. World Neurosurg 2019;122:e498–505 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.10.088 pmid:30394356

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Fiorella D,
   2. Boulos A,
   3. Turk AS, et al

   . The safety and effectiveness of the LVIS stent system for the treatment of wide-necked cerebral aneurysms: final results of the pivotal US LVIS trial. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:357–61 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014309 pmid:30297543

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Arthur AS,
   2. Molyneux A,
   3. Coon AL, et al

   . The safety and effectiveness of the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) system for the treatment of wide-necked bifurcation aneurysms: final 12-month results of the pivotal WEB Intrasaccular Therapy (WEB-IT) study. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:924–30 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2019-014815 pmid:30992395

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
10. 10.
    1. Gawlitza M,
    2. Soize S,
    3. Januel A-C, et al

    . Treatment of recurrent aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge (WEB): anatomical and clinical results. J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:629–33 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013287 pmid:29054913

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.
    1. Goertz L,
    2. Liebig T,
    3. Siebert E, et al

    . Extending the indication of Woven EndoBridge (WEB) embolization to internal carotid artery aneurysms: a multicenter safety and feasibility study. World Neurosurg 2019;126:e965–74 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2019.02.198 pmid:30876989

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.
    1. Kabbasch C,
    2. Goertz L,
    3. Siebert E, et al

    . WEB embolization versus stent-assisted coiling: comparison of complication rates and angiographic outcomes. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:812–16 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014555 pmid:30674636

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.
    1. Kaya HE,
    2. Bakdık S,
    3. Keskin F, et al

    . Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device: retrospective analysis of a single center experience. Clin Imaging 2020;59:25–29 doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2019.09.001 pmid:31715514

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.
    1. Lawson A,
    2. Molyneux A,
    3. Sellar R, et al

    . Safety results from the treatment of 109 cerebral aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge technique: preliminary results in the United Kingdom. J Neurosurg 2018;128:144–53 doi:10.3171/2016.9.JNS152849 pmid:28156251

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.
    1. Liebig T,
    2. Kabbasch C,
    3. Strasilla C, et al

    . Intrasaccular flow disruption in acutely ruptured aneurysms: a multicenter retrospective review of the use of the WEB. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1721–27 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4347 pmid:26138139

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.
    1. Maurer C,
    2. König I,
    3. Berlis A, et al

    . Two-center experience in the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge 17 device including midterm follow-up results: a retrospective analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1517–22 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6177 pmid:31467237

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.
    1. Ozpeynirci Y,
    2. Braun M,
    3. Pala A, et al

    . WEB-only treatment of ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a retrospective analysis of 47 aneurysms. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2019;161:1507–13 doi:10.1007/s00701-019-03988-0 pmid:31240584

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.
    1. Popielski J,
    2. Berlis A,
    3. Weber W, et al

    . Two-center experience in the endovascular treatment of ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms using the WEB device: a retrospective analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018;39:111–17 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5413 pmid:29051205

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.
    1. Raj R,
    2. Rautio R,
    3. Pekkola J, et al

    . Treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge device: a two-center experience. World Neurosurg 2019;123:e709–16 doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2018.12.010 pmid:30576812

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.
    1. van Rooij SB,
    2. van Rooij WJ,
    3. Peluso JP, et al

    . WEB treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a single-center cohort of 100 patients. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:2282–87 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5371 pmid:28882858

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Youssef PP,
    2. Dornbos D, III.,
    3. Peterson J, et al

    . Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device in the treatment of ruptured aneurysms. J Neuronterv Surg 2021;13:443–46 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016405 pmid:32719167

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Bsat S,
    2. Bsat A,
    3. Tamim H, et al

    . Safety of stent-assisted coiling for the treatment of wide-necked ruptured aneurysm: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of prevalence. Interv Neuroradiol 2020;26:547–56 doi:10.1177/1591019920945059 pmid:32741229

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Zhang X,
    2. Zuo Q,
    3. Tang H, et al

    . Stent assisted coiling versus non-stent assisted coiling for the management of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis and systematic review. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:489–96 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014388 pmid:30842307

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Barbe C,
    3. Nguyen HA, et al

    . Intraoperative complications of endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with coiling or balloon-assisted coiling in a prospective multicenter cohort of 1088 participants: Analysis of Recanalization after Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysm (ARETA) study. Radiology 2020;295:381–89 doi:10.1148/radiol.2020191842 pmid:32096707

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Barbe C,
    3. Herbreteau D, et al

    . Rebleeding and bleeding in the year following intracranial aneurysm coiling: analysis of a large prospective multicenter cohort of 1140 patients: Analysis of Recanalization after Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysm (ARETA) study. J NeuroIntervent Surg 2020;12:1219–25 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-015971 pmid:32546636

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. Molyneux AJ,
    2. Kerr RS,
    3. Yu L-M, et al

    . International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) Collaborative Group. International subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised comparison of effects on survival, dependency, seizures, rebleeding, subgroups, and aneurysm occlusion. Lancet 2005;366:809–17 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67214-5 pmid:16139655

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
27. 27.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Moret J,
    3. Barreau X, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB in the cumulative population of three prospective, multicenter series. J Neurointerv Surg 2018;10:553–59 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013448 pmid:28965106

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Costalat V,
    3. Moret J, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with WEB: results of the WEBCAST study. J Neurosurg 2016;124:1250–56 doi:10.3171/2015.2.JNS142634 pmid:26381253

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Gubucz I,
    3. Buhk JH, et al

    . Safety and efficacy of aneurysm treatment with the WEB: results of the WEBCAST 2 study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:1151–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5178 pmid:28450432

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Pierot L,
    2. Moret J,
    3. Turjman F, et al

    . WEB treatment of intracranial aneurysms: clinical and anatomic results in the French Observatory. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:655–59 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4578 pmid:26514608

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Hamilton MG,
    2. Dold ON

    . Spontaneous disappearance of an intracranial aneurysm after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Can J Neurol Sci 1992;19:389–91 pmid:1393850

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Murad MH,
    2. Montori VM,
    3. Ioannidis JPA, et al

    . How to read a systematic review and meta-analysis and apply the results to patient care: users’ guides to the medical literature. JAMA 2014;312:171–79 doi:10.1001/jama.2014.5559 pmid:25005654

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science