Managing Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysms—Are We Doing It Right?
Abstract INTRODUCTION The natural history and optimal treatment—of previously ruptured anterior communicating artery (ACOM) aneurysms that recur is unclear. This study determines whether our management decisions of endovascular treatment vs open surgery is correct with respect to recurrence and rebleeding rates. METHODS A retrospective observational study. All patients presenting to a single centre with a subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) secondary to an ACOM aneurysm were included. Data was collected from November 2012 to September 2018. Data collected included baseline demographics, aneurysm characteristics, management, complications, follow-up imaging, and outcomes. RESULTS A total of 137 patients were included in the study. A total of 113 aneurysms were coiled and 19 were clipped. The indication for clipping was due to aneurysm morphology or the presence of a haematoma exerting mass effect. Rates of vasospasm, infarction, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversion, rebleed, length of stay, and functional outcome were not significantly different in the 2 cohorts. Residual and recurrence was higher in the coiled cohort n = 46 vs clipping n = 2 (P = .0140) with over a quarter of these patients requiring further treatment at a median time of 16 mo. In a subgroup group analysis of coiled aneurysms, there was no statistical differences in rates of rebleed or functional outcome in those that recurred/had a residual and those that did not. CONCLUSION Patients treated with coiling have an increased risk of recurrence vs those treated with clipping. However, the risk of rebleed was not statistically significant. The prevention and impact of recurrence and residual aneurysms remain incompletely understood. Hence, treatment decisions should be considered carefully in a multidisciplinary setting.