Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Background and purpose With the recent relaunch of Artisse 2.0, optimal sizing strategies for the device are still being refined. The official sizing chart covers only taller-than-wide aneurysms within a limited diameter range of 3.4–6 mm. To expand its applicability, we propose an intuitive sizing strategy emphasizing the importance of preserving the device’s natural height.
Materials and methods Patients treated with the Artisse 2.0 between November 2022 and October 2024 were retrospectively analyzed.
Results Among 26 aneurysms treated over a 24-month period, 13 exhibited varying degrees of ‘dog-ear’ formation on post-deployment imaging. These cases showed greater width oversizing (+2.06 vs +1.29 mm, P<0.05) and height reduction (−1.83 vs −0.53 mm, P<0.05) compared with cases with complete neck coverage. Similarly, 9 out of the 16 aneurysms with at least one surveillance imaging failed to achieve complete angiographic occlusion. These cases were also associated with greater width oversizing (+1.72 vs +1.43 mm, P=0.47) and height reduction (−2.18 vs −0.81 mm, P=0.052).
Conclusion In contrast to the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device, excessive lateral compression and height reduction appear to undermine the stability of the Artisse 2.0. As a result, the device size for spherical or ovoid aneurysms can be determined using the ‘+1/–1’ method, while the ‘+1/–0’ approach is recommended for cylindrical aneurysms to improve neck coverage through height preservation. These proposed sizing strategies may serve as a practical interim solution until more clinical data and user experience become available.
- Aneurysm
- Device
- Intervention
- Technique
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. The datasets analyzed during this study are protected under patient privacy regulations but may be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with appropriate institutional approvals.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
Data are available upon reasonable request. The datasets analyzed during this study are protected under patient privacy regulations but may be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with appropriate institutional approvals.
Footnotes
X @salehlamin
Contributors Conception and design of study: HSC (guarantor). Acquisition of data: HSC. Analysis and/or interpretation of data: HSC, SL. Drafting the manuscript: HSC, SA-A, BB, SC, SL. Revising the manuscript critically for important intellectual content: HSC, SA-A, BB, SC, SL. Approval of the version of the manuscript to be published: HSC, BB, SA-A, SC, SL.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests The authors declare the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: HSC reports consulting contract for Medtronic, Terumo and phenox. SL consults for Balt, Medtronic, Terumo, phenox and Stryker. The remaining authors declare no competing interests. No industry funding was received for this study.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.