Endovascular Treatment of Dissecting XXXX and Predictors of Outcome.

@entity1 @entity101 @entity548 @entity1276 @entity439 @entity5487 @entity432
BACKGROUND: Isolated dissecting @entity5487 (PICA) are rare lesions, which carry high risk of rebleeding and mortality. However, the existing literature concerning predictors of outcome after endovascular treatment is limited and controversial. Our present study retrospectively reviewed and analyzed the clinical outcome of endovascular treatment-ruptured PICA-dissecting @entity439 and explored the predictors of outcome. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 17 consecutive @entity1 with ruptured PICA dissecting @entity439 that underwent endovascular treatment from January 2003 to January 2014. Nine @entity1 underwent selective coiling, whereas 7 @entity1 underwent parent @entity432 and 1 @entity1 underwent stent-assisted coiling. Follow-up outcomes were evaluated using the modified Rankin Scale. The clinical outcomes of @entity1 were categorized as favorable (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-1) or unfavorable (mRS score 2-6). RESULTS: Favorable outcomes (mRS score 0-1) were obtained in 13 of 17 @entity1 . Post-treatment recurrence occurred in 1 @entity1 with selective coiling in the 15-month follow-up, and the @entity1 received stent-assisted coiling. The only @entity1 with stent-assisted coiling developed PICA occlusion during follow-up. @entity439 located in distal segment usually presented with @entity548 (P  =  .015). @entity101 , coexisting @entity1276 , and time to operation (latter than 2  weeks) were associated with unfavorable outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of isolated dissecting @entity439 of PICA had excellent clinical outcomes, @entity101 , coexisting @entity1276 , and time to operation (latter than 2  weeks), which were associated with unfavorable outcome. Long-term follow-ups are necessary to provide stronger conclusions.
