World neurosurgery · 2019
Revascularization of the Anterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Using Extracranial and Intracranial Donors: A Morphometric Cadaveric Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
De Vilalta Alex, Kournoutas Ioannis, Ojeda Pablo López, Canals Andreu Gabarrós, Vigo Vera, Rutledge Caleb W, Chae Ricky, Abla Adib A, Rubio Roberto Rodriguez
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Anterior inferior cerebellar artery (AICA) aneurysms are rare, accounting for 0.2%-1.3% of all intracranial aneurysms. The standard treatment is often endovascular embolization or neck clipping; however, sacrifice of the parent vessel is sometimes necessary. Addition of revascularization procedures is a subject of controversy. The occipital artery (OA) has been used as a donor for bypass, but recently there has been a trend toward intracranial-intracranial approaches. The posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA)-AICA side-to-side bypass may serve as a safe alternative.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the PICA-AICA side-to-side bypass and the OA-AICA end-to-side bypass and review the literature relevant to AICA revascularization.
METHODS: We performed a far-lateral approach on 12 cadaveric specimens and analyzed the regional anatomy. On this basis, we performed either an OA-AICA or a PICA-AICA bypass and took morphometric measurements relevant to the technique.
RESULTS: PICA-AICA bypass was successful in 6/12 specimens. The length of the flocculopeduncular segment was 42.6 ± 15.8 mm in the specimens in which the bypass was feasible and 26.2 ± 7.2 mm in those in which the bypass was not feasible (P = 0.04). Mean distance between AICA and PICA was 5.3 ± 4 mm in the specimens in which side-to-side bypass was feasible and 11.6 ± 4.2 mm in the specimens in which it was not (P = 0.02). OA-AICA end-to-side bypass was feasible in all the specimens (75% in the flocculopeduncular segment; 25% in the cortical segment).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cadaveric study analyzing the PICA-AICA side-to-side bypass for AICA revascularization. Our analyses provide evidence for the feasibility of this bypass and document the anatomic variations that may indicate its use.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize the PICA-AICA side-to-side bypass and the OA-AICA end-to-side bypass and review the literature relevant to AICA revascularization.
METHODS: We performed a far-lateral approach on 12 cadaveric specimens and analyzed the regional anatomy. On this basis, we performed either an OA-AICA or a PICA-AICA bypass and took morphometric measurements relevant to the technique.
RESULTS: PICA-AICA bypass was successful in 6/12 specimens. The length of the flocculopeduncular segment was 42.6 ± 15.8 mm in the specimens in which the bypass was feasible and 26.2 ± 7.2 mm in those in which the bypass was not feasible (P = 0.04). Mean distance between AICA and PICA was 5.3 ± 4 mm in the specimens in which side-to-side bypass was feasible and 11.6 ± 4.2 mm in the specimens in which it was not (P = 0.02). OA-AICA end-to-side bypass was feasible in all the specimens (75% in the flocculopeduncular segment; 25% in the cortical segment).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first cadaveric study analyzing the PICA-AICA side-to-side bypass for AICA revascularization. Our analyses provide evidence for the feasibility of this bypass and document the anatomic variations that may indicate its use.