Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Showing posts with label Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 21, 2021

Safety and efficacy results of the Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED) stent system in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: US pivotal trial

Wrong endpoint. Safe installation of the device is only an intermediate step. What are your followup steps to get to 100% recovery? This is why survivors need to be in charge, a lot of stroke research has the wrong endpoint.

 Safety and efficacy results of the Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED) stent system in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: US pivotal trial

  1. Cameron G McDougall1,
  2. Orlando Diaz2,
  3. Alan Boulos3,
  4. Adnan H Siddiqui4,5,
  5. Justin Caplan1,
  6. Johanna T Fifi6,
  7. Aquilla S Turk7,
  8. Yasha Kayan8,
  9. Pascal Jabbour9
  1. Correspondence to Dr Cameron G McDougall, Department of Neurosurgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA; cgm@jhmi.edu

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED) flow diverter in support of an application for Food and Drug Administration approval in the USA.

Methods 145 patients were enrolled in a prospective, single-arm multicenter trial. Patients with aneurysms of unfavorable morphology for traditional endovascular therapies (large, wide-necked, fusiform, etc) were included. The trial was designed to demonstrate non-inferiority in both safety and effectiveness, comparing trial results with performance goals (PGs) established from peer-reviewed published literature. The primary safety endpoint was death or major stroke (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥4 points) within 30 days of the procedure, or any major ipsilateral stroke or neurological death within the first year. The primary effectiveness endpoint was complete occlusion of the target aneurysm with ≤50% stenosis of the parent artery at 12 months after treatment, and in which an alternative treatment of the target intracranial aneurysm had not been performed.

Results 145 patients underwent attempted placement of a FRED device, and one or more devices were placed in all 145 patients. 135/145 (93%) had a single device placed. Core laboratory adjudication deemed 106 (73.1%) of the aneurysms large or giant. A safety endpoint was experienced by 9/145 (6.2%) patients, successfully achieving the safety PG of <15%. The effectiveness PG of >46% aneurysm occlusion was also achieved, with the effectiveness endpoint being met in 80/139 (57.6%)

Conclusion As compared with historically derived performance benchmarks, the FRED flow diverter is both safe and effective for the treatment of appropriately selected intracranial aneurysms.

Clinical registration number NCT01801007

Data availability statement

No data are available.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

 

Thursday, July 1, 2021

Flow redirection endoluminal device (FRED) for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review

After your doctor reviews the pros and cons of this device you can decide what to do. Ask your doctor the chances of your aneurysm rupturing and the likely damage from that.  With all that information presented you can make an informed decision.

Flow redirection endoluminal device (FRED) for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review 

First Published June 30, 2021 Research Article 

The Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED; MicroVention) is a dual-layered flow diverter used for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. The objective of this systematic review was to compile device-related safety and effectiveness data.

The literature from January 1, 2013 to April 30, 2021 was searched for studies describing use of the FRED for intracranial aneurysm treatment irrespective of aneurysm location and morphology. The review included anterior and posterior circulation ruptured and unruptured saccular, fusiform or dissection, and blister aneurysms. MeSH terms related to “flow re-direction endoluminal device” and “FRED for aneurysms” were used. Data related to indication, complications, and rates of aneurysm occlusion were retrieved and analyzed.

Twenty-two studies with 1729 intracranial aneurysms were included in this review. Overall reported morbidity was 3.9% (range 0–20%). Overall procedure-related mortality was 1.4% (range 0–6%). Complication rates fell into 5 categories: technical (3.6%), ischemic (3.8%), thrombotic or stenotic (6%), hemorrhagic (1.5%), and non-neurological (0.8%). The aneurysm occlusion rate between 0 and 3 months (reported in 11 studies) was 47.8%. The occlusion rate between 4 and 6 months (reported in 14 studies) was 73.8%. Occlusion rates continued to increase to 75.1% at 7–12 months (reported in 10 studies) and 86.6% for follow-up beyond 1 year (reported in 10 studies).

This review indicated that the FRED is a safe and effective for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Future studies should directly compare the FRED with other flow diverters for a better understanding of comparative safety and effectiveness among the different devices.