Skip to content

Flow Diversion in Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment

A Randomized Trial Comparing Flow Diversion and Best-standard Treatment - the FIAT Trial

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01349582
Acronym
FIAT
Enrollment
323
Registered
2011-05-06
Start date
2011-05-02
Completion date
2023-01-31
Last updated
2023-07-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Intracranial Aneurysm

Keywords

flow diversion, endovascular treatment, symptomatic aneurysm, cavernous carotid aneurysm, ophthalmic aneurysm, vertebral aneurysm

Brief summary

Flow diverters are a recent addition to the range of endovascular devices now available for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. The FIAT trial aims at comparing flow diversion to best standard treatment in the context of a randomised controlled trial. Best standard treatment may include any of the following and will be left to the treating physician to decide : 1) conservative management; 2) coiling with or without high porosity stenting; 3) parent vessel occlusion with or without bypass; 4) surgical clipping. If the only treatment alternative is deemed to be flow diversion for compassionate use, then randomisation will not be carried out, but patient will enter a registry and her data recorded according to same schedule as randomised patients. The primary hypothesis is that flow diversion can be performed with an acceptable immediate complication rate, defined as less than 15% morbidity and mortality, AND increase the number of patients experiencing successful therapy, defined as complete or near complete occlusion of the aneurysm from 75 to 90%, relative to best standard treatment.

Detailed description

Background: Intracranial aneurysms, particularly large/giant, fusiform or recurrent aneurysms are increasingly treated with flow diverters (FDs), a recently introduced and approved neurovascular device. While some rare cases may not be treated any other way, in most patients a more conventional, conservative, or validated approach such as coiling, parent vessel occlusion, or surgical clipping exists. Early series and registries of the use of FDs in various types of aneurysms have reported treatment-related morbidity and mortality ranging from 0 to 4 and 8% respectively, most often from delayed haemorrhage. Hence, although there is growing enthusiasm to use these powerful new tools, complications are increasingly reported. Rationale and Hypothesis: There is an urgent need to offer the new tool afforded by FDs to patients currently presenting with a difficult aneurysm, in a context that can offer protection from over-optimistic perspectives, fashion, learning curves and marketing. Only a randomized clinical trial can offer such protection as well as provide an answer to the question of which treatment option leads to better patient outcomes. The primary hypothesis is that flow diversion can be performed with an acceptable immediate complication rate, defined as less than 15% morbidity and mortality (modified Rankin Score \> 2 at 3 months), AND increase the number of patients experiencing successful therapy, defined as complete or near complete occlusion of the aneurysm from 75 to 90%. Objectives: Compare flow diversion (FD) to Best-Standard Treatment (BST) in the context of an RCT. BST may be any of the following: 1) conservative management; 2) coiling with or without high porosity stenting; 3) parent vessel occlusion with or without bypass; 4) surgical clipping; 5) enter a registry for FD, when the only treatment alternative is FD for compassionate use. Methods: Following randomization to FD or BST, patients will undergo the assigned intervention and be followed for 12 months. Clinical status will be recorded at discharge, at 1-3 months, and at 3-12 months. Angiographic evaluation will be recorded at 3-12 months. Adverse Events will be recorded immediately after the procedure and during the 12-month follow-up period. Patients in the FD registry will similarly be followed for 12 months. A total of 344 patients will be recruited in 20 centers worldwide. The trial is expected to last for 5 years. Analysis: Comparability between FD and BST groups will use descriptive statistics or frequency tables, independent ANOVAs or Mantel-Haentzel and chi-square tests. Comparison of primary outcome will use a z-test for independent proportions at 12 months. Safety data will be compared through independent t-tests or chi-square statistics. Logistic regression will be used to find variables capable of predicting success in both groups at 12 months.

Interventions

PROCEDUREballoon parent vessel occlusion

sacrifice of parent artery of aneurysm by endovascular balloon occlusion with or without bypass

PROCEDUREsurgical clipping

clipping of the aneurysm following invasive brain surgery

endovascular treatment with flow diversion including standard management of thrombo-embolic risk

conservative management is watchful observation of the aneurysm until indication for intervention arises

standard endovascular coiling of aneurysm with any type of already approved coil. High porosity stents may be used as an adjunct technique to coiling

Sponsors

Centre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal
CollaboratorOTHER
Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Any patient with a difficult intracranial aneurysm in whom flow diversion is considered an appropriate if not the best but yet unproved therapeutic option by the participating clinician. Current indications may be (but not restricted to) symptomatic large or giant cavernous carotid, ophthalmic and vertebral aneurysms, fusiform intradural aneurysms, or recurring, persistent lesions after previous coiling. Aneurysm may be a recent rupture, although risks associated with antiplatelet regimens in this context should make this option rarely used

Exclusion criteria

* Severe allergy, intolerance or bleeding disorder that prohibit the use of ASA or clopidogrel. * Absolute contraindication to endovascular treatment or anesthesia. * Patients unable to give informed consent.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
rate of success of therapy12 monthsRate of success increases from 75% to 90%, with success defined as complete or near complete occlusion of the aneurysm combined with a modified Rankin score of less or equal to 2.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
modified Rankin scoredischarge, 3 and 12 monthsmodified Rankin score at discharge, and at 3 and 12 months post-treatment (last observation carried forward)
rate of peri-operative complications30 daysrate of ischemic strokes and intracranial hemorrhages during the peri-operative period
rate of Adverse Events12 monthsrate of new stroke, neurological symptom or sign during follow-up
angiographic outcome12 monthsdegree of occlusion of aneurysm as assessed by invasive or non-invasive imaging (last observation carried forward
rate of retreatment of index aneurysm12 monthsrate of retreatment of index aneurysm due residual aneurysm after initial treatment

Countries

Canada

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 28, 2026