Treatment of XXXX with hydrogel coated expandable coils.

@entity1 @entity439 @entity902 @entity438
BACKGROUND: Coiling of @entity438 with @entity902 coils sometimes results in relatively poor angiographic results which may be is related to low packing volumes achieved. Hydrogel coated expandable coils (HydroCoil) have been shown to achieve better @entity439 volume filling which may potentially result in lower recanalization rates. Currently there is limited clinical data on their safety and efficacy in @entity439 treatment. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospectively collected database on @entity1 treated at the Toronto Western Hospital. The analysis included the @entity1 ' characteristics, @entity439 size, packing, procedure related complications, recanalization and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-nine @entity439 were treated with HydroCoils only or in combination with other coils. The average calculated filling of the @entity439 volume was 74-76%. On the immediate post treatment angiograms, 44% of the @entity439 were completely obliterated, 33% had a residual neck and, in 20%, a residual @entity439 was seen. Follow-up imaging was available in 23 cases. On imaging follow-up (from 2 days to 11 months) one dissecting @entity439 had recanalized. There were six technical/medical complications with no clinical consequences. Two clinically significant procedural related complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS: HydroCoils can be used effectively to treat @entity438 . The volume expansion allows for much greater packing than described for bare @entity902 coils, which may result in better long-term results. The recanalization rate is low but the limited follow-up does not allow for any conclusion regarding the long-term outcome. The complication rate is similar to larger current series using bare @entity902 coils.
