Skip to main content
Search
Search
Advanced Search
Skip main navigation
Open access
Research Article
1 August 2025

Hospital readmission among patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms undergoing stent-assisted endovascular coiling using the ENTERPRISE® 2 stent versus Neuroform® Atlas stent

Authors: Reade DeLeacy https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9447-5338, Zhiqiang Yao https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0868-7536, Rahul Khanna https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2478-1724 [email protected], Emilie Kottenmeier https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9039-2823, and Yiran Rong https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8571-3872Author Info & Affiliations
Volume 14, Number 10
https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2025-0096
PDFFormats

Abstract

Aim: Stent-assisted endovascular coiling is a safe and effective treatment for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). This study compared 180-day inpatient readmission and cost among patients with UIA who underwent stent-assisted coiling (SAC) using the ENTERPRISE® 2 or Neuroform® Atlas stent. Materials & methods: In this retrospective cohort study, adults with UIA undergoing SAC were identified in the Premier Healthcare Database (2016–2022) and grouped based on the stent used: ENTERPRISE 2 or Neuroform Atlas. Outcomes included all-cause and UIA-related inpatient readmission in the 180 days following treatment, index admission and supply cost. Inverse probability of treatment weighting of propensity score method balanced the two cohorts on study covariates. A weighted generalized estimating equation model assessed study outcomes. Results: A total of 1017 patients were included (ENTERPRISE 2, n = 126; Neuroform Atlas, n = 891). Hospital and patient characteristics except race were well-balanced after weighting. Patients treated with ENTERPRISE 2 versus Neuroform Atlas were 55% less likely to have an all-cause inpatient readmission in the 180-day follow-up period (odds ratio 0.45, 95% CI: 0.20–0.98, p = 0.04). Further, the ENTERPRISE 2 cohort had significantly lower index supply cost ($20,442 vs $27,561, exponentiated ratio 0.74, 95% CI: 0.61–0.90, p = 0.002) compared with the Neuroform Atlas cohort. No significant differences were observed in UIA-related inpatient readmission or total index admission cost between cohorts. Conclusion: Among patients with UIA undergoing SAC, the use of ENTERPRISE 2 stent was associated with a significantly reduced risk of all-cause inpatient hospital readmission and significantly lower index supply cost compared with the Neuroform Atlas stent.

Plain language summary

What is this article about?

Unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) affect about 3% of the population. Stent-assisted endovascular coiling is a common treatment modality for UIA. This study compared readmissions and costs among UIA patients undergoing stent-assisted endovascular coiling using the ENTERPRISE® 2 stent versus Neuroform® Atlas stent.

What were the results?

Patients treated with ENTERPRISE 2 stent had a significantly lower risk of all-cause inpatient hospital readmission and lower cost of supplies during admission for coiling procedure compared with those treated with Neuroform Atlas stent. There were no differences in UIA related inpatient readmission or total admission cost between the two groups.

What do the results mean?

The use of ENTERPRISE 2 stent (vs Neuroform Atlas stent) was associated with lower costs and hospital readmission rates following stent-assisted endovascular coiling for UIA.

Graphical abstract

Flowchart showing patient attrition in the study, with two treatment groups labeled ENTERPRISE 2 and Neuroform Atlas.

Supplementary Material

File (supplementary figure.docx)

References

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest
1.
Korja M, Lehto H, Juvela S. Lifelong rupture risk of intracranial aneurysms depends on risk factors: a prospective Finnish cohort study. Stroke 45(7), 1958–1963 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
2.
Wiebers DO, Whisnant JP, Huston J et al. Unruptured intracranial aneurysms: natural history, clinical outcome, and risks of surgical and endovascular treatment. Lancet 362(9378), 103–110 (2003).
Google Scholar
3.
Brown RD. Unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Semin. Neurol. 30(5), 537–544 (2010).
PubMed
Google Scholar
4.
Nieuwkamp DJ, Setz LE, Algra A, Linn FH, de Rooij NK, Rinkel GJ. Changes in case fatality of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage over time, according to age, sex, and region: a meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 8(7), 635–642 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
5.
Vlak MH, Algra A, Brandenburg R, Rinkel GJ. Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, with emphasis on sex, age, comorbidity, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 10(7), 626–636 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
6.
Smith GA, Dagostino P, Maltenfort MG, Dumont AS, Ratliff JK. Geographic variation and regional trends in adoption of endovascular techniques for cerebral aneurysms. J. Neurosurg. 114(6), 1768–1777 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
7.
Hwang JS, Hyun MK, Lee HJ et al. Endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm: a systematic review. BMC Neurol. 12, 99 (2012).
PubMed
Google Scholar
8.
Brinjikji W, Rabinstein AA, Lanzino G, Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ. Patient outcomes are better for unruptured cerebral aneurysms treated at centers that preferentially treat with endovascular coiling: a study of the national inpatient sample 2001–2007. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 32(6), 1065–1070 (2011).
PubMed
Google Scholar
9.
Li L, Xu GQ, Gao HL et al. Endovascular treatment of intracranial vertebral artery unruptured dissecting aneurysms: comparison of flow diversion and stent-assisted coiling or stenting alone. Front. Neurol. 13, 919866 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
10.
Lo YL, Bih ZL, Yu YH, Li MC, Chen HM, Wu SY. Long-term medical resource consumption between surgical clipping and endovascular coiling for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a propensity score–matched, nationwide, population-based cohort study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18(11), 5989 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
11.
el-Chalouhi N, Jabbour PM, Tjoumakaris SI et al. Treatment of large and giant intracranial aneurysms: cost comparison of flow diversion and traditional embolization strategies. World Neurosurg. 82(5), 696–701 (2014).
PubMed
Google Scholar
12.
Bairstow P, Dodgson A, Linto J, Khangure M. Comparison of cost and outcome of endovascular and neurosurgical procedures in the treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Australas. Radiol. 46(3), 249–251 (2002).
PubMed
Google Scholar
13.
Maud A, Lakshminarayan K, Suri MF, Vazquez G, Lanzino G, Qureshi AI. Cost-effectiveness analysis of endovascular versus neurosurgical treatment for ruptured intracranial aneurysms in the United States. J. Neurosurg. 110(5), 880–886 (2009).
PubMed
Google Scholar
14.
Armoiry X, Turjman F, Hartmann D et al. Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with the WEB device: a systematic review of clinical outcomes. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 37(5), 868–872 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
15.
Hendricks BK, Yoon JS, Yaeger K et al. Wide-neck aneurysms: systematic review of the neurosurgical literature with a focus on definition and clinical implications. J. Neurosurg. 133(1), 159–165 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
16.
Park HS, Kwon SC, Park ES, Park JB, Kim MS. A new definition for wide-necked cerebral aneurysms. J. Cerebrovasc. Endovasc. Neurosurg. 21(4), 193–198 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
17.
Kadkhodayan Y, Rhodes N, Blackburn S, Derdeyn CP, Cross DT, Moran CJ. Comparison of Enterprise with Neuroform stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms. Am. J. Roentgenol. 200(4), 872–878 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This study highlights that ENTERPRISE® stent use was associated with statistically significant superior deployment rate and occlusion rate as compared with Neuroform® stent.
18.
Hwang S-K, Hwang G, Bang JS, Oh CW, Kwon OK. Endovascular Enterprise stent-assisted coil embolization for wide-necked unruptured intracranial aneurysms. J. Clin. Neurosci. 20(9), 1276–1279 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
19.
Leacy R, Kottenmeier E, Lee SH, Khanna R, Spiotta AM. Endovascular treatment with the Enterprise stent versus the Neuroform or low-profile visualized intraluminal support stent for unruptured aneurysms. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 10(4), 295–305 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This retrospective cohort study suggests that ENTERPRISE stent use was associated with significantly lower risk of readmissions versus other stent including Neuroform stent.
20.
Wang J, Vargas J, Spiotta A et al. Stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms: a single-center clinical and angiographic analysis. J. Neurointerv. Surg. 10(7), 687–692 (2018).
PubMed
Google Scholar
21.
Gentric JC, Biondi A, Piotin M et al. Safety and efficacy of neuroform for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a prospective, consecutive, French multicentric study. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 34(6), 1203–1208 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
22.
Dong L, Wang J, Chen X et al. Stent-assisted coiling using the Neuroform Atlas stent for treatment of aneurysms that recur after coil embolization. Front. Neurol. 13, 967942 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
23.
Caragliano AA, Papa R, Pitrone A et al. The low-profile Neuroform Atlas stent in the treatment of wide-necked intracranial aneurysms – immediate and midterm results: an Italian multicenter registry. J. Neuroradiol. 47(6), 421–427 (2020).
PubMed
Google Scholar
24.
King B, Vaziri S, Singla A, Fargen KM, Mocco J. Clinical and angiographic outcomes after stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms with Enterprise and Neuroform stents: a comparative analysis of the literature. J. Neurointerv. Surg. 7(12), 905–909 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
• This literature review demonstrates that ENTERPRISE use is associated with lower rates of hardware failure at deployment, peri-procedural intracranial hemorrhage and recanalization and higher rates of complete occlusion as compared to Neuroform stent.
25.
Kono K, Terada T. In vitro experiments of vessel wall apposition between the Enterprise and Enterprise 2 stents for treatment of cerebral aneurysms. Acta Neurochir. (Wien) 158(2), 241–245 (2016).
PubMed
Google Scholar
26.
Chihara H, Ishii A, Kikuchi T, Ikeda H, Arai D, Miyamoto S. Deployment technique that takes advantage of the characteristics of Enterprise VRD2: an in vitro study. J. Neurointerv. Surg. 9(10), 969–973 (2017).
PubMed
Google Scholar
27.
Li Z, Xuan J, Fang X et al. Comparison of Enterprise stent 2 with 1 in assisting coiling of ruptured aneurysms: a real-world study. J. Comp. Eff. Res. 11(12), 879–887 (2022).
PubMed
Google Scholar
28.
Jankowitz BT, Hanel R, Jadhav AP et al. Neuroform Atlas Stent System for the treatment of intracranial aneurysm: primary results of the Atlas Humanitarian Device Exemption cohort. J. Neurointerv. Surg. 11(8), 801–806 (2019).
PubMed
Google Scholar
29.
Daou BJ, Palmateer G, Linzey JR et al. Stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms: head to head comparison between the Neuroform Atlas and EZ stents. Interv. Neuroradiol. 27(3), 353–361 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
30.
Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat. Med. 34(28), 3661–3679 (2015).
PubMed
Google Scholar
31.
Iwakami T, Fujii N, Son J. Comparison of the physical characteristics of support stents for cerebral aneurysm embolization. J. Neuroendovasc. Ther. 15(12), 778–786 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
32.
Kato N, Yuki I, Otani K et al. Flow Diverter apposition in patients with large or giant intracranial aneurysms evaluated on three-dimensional fusion images acquired by high-resolution cone-beam computed tomography and digital subtraction angiography. World Neurosurg. 147, e388–e395 (2021).
PubMed
Google Scholar
33.
Heller R, Calnan DR, Lanfranchi M, Madan N, Malek AM. Incomplete stent apposition in Enterprise stent-mediated coiling of aneurysms: persistence over time and risk of delayed ischemic events. J. Neurosurg. 118(5), 1014–1022 (2013).
PubMed
Google Scholar
|