Abstract 163: Woven EndoBridge 17 Device for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

• Published in: Stroke: vascular and interventional neurology Vol. 4; no. S1
• Main Authors: Rodriguez-Calienes, A, Castillo-Huerta, N M, Vivanco-Suarez, J, Vilca-Salas, M I, Bustamante-Paytan, D, Borjas-Calderón, N, Bruno-Peña, A, Galecio-Castillo, M, Morán-Mariños, C, Algin, O, Guerrero, W R, Ortega-Gutierrez, S
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Phoenix Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.11.2024
• Subjects: Aneurysms
• ISSN: 2694-5746; 2694-5746
• DOI: 10.1161/SVIN.04.suppl_1.163

IntroductionThe Woven EndoBridge 17 (WEB 17) is the most recent advance of the WEB device. As it has been recently introduced, there is ongoing lack of information regarding its occlusion rates, procedural complications, and mortality. This meta‐analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the WEB 17 device in patients with intracranial aneurysms (IAs).MethodsA systematic literature search from inception to October 2023 was conducted across four databases for studies involving IAs treated with WEB 17. Primary outcomes included adequate angiographic occlusion at the last follow‐up, and a composite of intraprocedural and postprocedural complications up to 30 days. Comparative meta‐analysis between WEB‐17 and its predecessor versions (pvWEB) was performed. Subgroup analyses by IA rupture status were also conducted for the primary outcomes.ResultsEleven studies with 880 patients and 933 IAs were included in the analysis. Efficacy outcomes revealed a rate of adequate occlusion at the last follow‐up of 91% (95% CI 86‐94%) and a complete occlusion rate of 69% (95% CI 65‐73%). Safety outcomes demonstrated a composite rate of 7% (95% CI 4‐11%), an intraprocedural complications rate of 7% (95% CI 5‐9%; I2=0%), and a postprocedural complications rate of 2% (95% CI 1‐5%; I2=0%). No differences were found between WEB‐17 and pvWEB in terms of adequate occlusion (WEB‐17: 87.7% vs. pvWEB: 80.4%; OR=1.35, 95% CI 0.71‐2.55) and safety composite outcome (WEB‐17: 8.7% vs. pvWEB: 10%; OR=1.05, 95% CI 0.51‐2.16). Subgroup analysis by rupture status did not evidence heterogeneity between subgroups (p=0.49) in terms of adequate occlusion and the composite safety outcome (p=0.83).ConclusionsThe WEB 17 device provides adequate efficacy and safety profiles for IAs, comparable to its predecessor versions. This clinical effect is consistent in both ruptured and unruptured aneurysms.