PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 29, 2026Neurosurgery0 citations

The Safety and Efficacy of Pipeline Embolization in Pediatric Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Institutional Experience

View Full Paper
JCJoshua A. CuocoMGMaxwell D. GruberLBLokeshwar S. Bhenderu

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the Pipeline Embolization Device in treating pediatric intracranial aneurysms and compares it with adult outcomes.
  • Conducted a systematic literature review on PubMed to find studies related to Pipeline Embolization Device in pediatric patients.
  • Included institutional data from children's use of the device.
  • Performed basic and comparative analyses of safety and efficacy outcomes between pediatric and adult populations.
  • Included 114 pediatric patients with 120 aneurysms compared to 2098 adult patients with 2393 aneurysms.
  • No significant differences in major complications or neurologic mortality between pediatric and adult populations.
  • Higher complete aneurysm occlusion in children (92.0% vs. 76.7%, P < .001).
  • Pediatric patients showed higher incidence of asymptomatic in-stent stenosis (4.2% vs. 1.1%, P = .005) and thrombosis (3.4% vs. 0.2%, P < .001).

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pediatric intracranial aneurysms are rare and often exhibit complex morphologies not amenable to conventional microsurgical reconstruction or endovascular embolization. The Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) is an alternative endovascular treatment of these lesions; however, this device is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in children due to limited data. Here, we investigated the safety and efficacy of the PED in the pediatric population and compared these outcomes with those in adult populations to expand the current literature in using this device in children. METHODS: A systematic literature review of the PubMed database was performed to identify studies describing the PED in children (18 years or younger). The authors' institutional experience with the device in children was included. Basic analyses of the pediatric cohort were performed. Comparative analyses of safety and efficacy outcomes were conducted between the pediatric cohort and previous adult studies. RESULTS: A total of 114 pediatric patients with 120 intracranial aneurysms were included. Six previous adult studies provided 2098 patients with 2393 aneurysms. There were no significant differences in major complications or neurologic mortality between populations. Pediatric patients were more likely to develop asymptomatic in-stent stenosis (4.2% vs 1.1%, P = .005) and asymptomatic in-stent thrombosis (3.4% vs 0.2%, P < .001). Complete aneurysm occlusion was higher in children on follow-up angiography (92.0% vs 76.7%, P < .001). The incidence rates of major complications and neurologic mortality per patient-month at risk were similar between populations. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found that off-label use of the PED for pediatric intracranial aneurysms has an overall similar safety profile, yet improved efficacy outcome compared with on-label use in adults. These data may help lay the foundation for approval of the PED in treating pediatric intracranial aneurysms.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cuoco et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69c8c28cde0f0f753b39ce0ehttps://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000004014
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper