LAUSR

BACKGROUND The pipeline embolization device (PED; ev3/Covidien) has proven safe and effective for treating selected intracranial aneurysms. This device's versatility and popularity have driven increased interest in expanding the latest 2018 Food and Drug Administration-approved indications. OBJECTIVE To compare "off-label" and "on-label" PED treatment. METHODS Retrospective analysis of aneurysms treated with PED at a single center from 2013 to 2019. Comparisons were made based on the 2018 Food and Drug Administration-approved indications. RESULTS A total of 492 treated aneurysms were included (65.2% on-label and 34.8% off-label). Aneurysm complete and near-complete occlusion rate was nonsignificantly lower in the off-label group (80.9% vs 85.7%; P = .19). Off-label treatment had higher rate of poor functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] >2: 10.3% vs 3.5%; P = .002). Although pretreatment mRS was already higher in the off-label group (5.3% vs 0.3%; P < .001) and there were no differences in mRS worsening during follow-up (5.5% vs 2.9%; P = .15). We also found a trend to a higher rate of intracranial hemorrhagic complications in the off-label group (4.7% vs 1.6%; P = .05), but there were no differences in hemorrhages requiring surgical intervention (1.8% vs 1.3%; P = .65). There were no differences in retreatment, thromboembolic complications, and mortality rates. CONCLUSION Off-label PED treatment may be considered for select aneurysms, which are challenging to treat with other techniques. These cases have similar complete and near-complete occlusion rates compared with on-label cases. There are, however, higher risks of poor functional outcomes despite similar rates of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications. This is partly explained by the significantly higher pretreatment mRS score in the off-label group.