Table 2:

Treatment characteristics, safety, and feasibility

Characteristics, Safety, and Feasibility^{^a}
Treatment parameter
Reason for choosing LVIS EVO	Wide neck(n = 56) (94.9%)		Flow diversion (n = 2) (3.4%)		Bailout (n = 1) (1.7%)
Ease of deployment	Very poor (n = 0) (0%)	Poor (n = 0) (0%)	Intermediate (n = 0) (0%)		Good (n = 4) (6.8%)		Very good (n = 55) (93.2%)
Radiopacity	Very poor (n = 0) (0%)	Poor (n = 0) (0%)	Intermediate(n = 1) (1.7%)		Good (n = 28) (47.5%)		Very good (n = 30) (50.8%)
Treatment technique	Jailing technique (n = 52) (88.1%)		WEB and stent (n = 3) (5.1%)		Stent only (n = 2) (3.4%)		Coiling passing through stent (n = 2) (3.4%)
Safety
Technical complications	Thrombus formation (n = 3) (5.1%)		Stent shortening (n = 1) (1.7%)	Incomplete stent opening (n = 1) (1.7%)	Coil protrusion (n = 1) (1.7%)		Unrelated to LVIS EVO (n = 1) (1.7%)
Clinical complications^{^b}	TIA (n = 2) (3.4%)		Major stroke^{^c}(n = 1) (1.7%)	Minor stroke^{^d}(n = 1) (1.7%)	GIT bleeding (n = 1) (1.7%)	Leg ischemia (n = 1) (1.7%)	Puncture side bleeding(n = 1)(1.7%)
Feasibility
Occlusion immediately after treatment^{^e}	I: Complete occlusion (n = 32) (54.2%)		II: Residual neck (n = 6) (10.2%)		IIIa: Residual neck with contrast within coil interstices (n = 18) (30.5%)		IIIb: Residual neck with contrast along aneurysm wall(n = 3) (5.1%)

Note:—GIT indicates gastrointestinal tract.
↵a Data are mean [SD], (minimum to maximum), or absolute number of cases (relative frequency in %).
↵b Two patients had 2 clinical complications, respectively.
↵c Not related to the intervention (most likely caused by vasospasm).
↵d Related to the intervention (stroke in vascular territory of stented artery).
↵e Reported according to the modified Raymond-Roy classification.