Treatment of posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms with flow diversion versus stent-assisted coiling: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment of non-saccular aneurysms of the posterior circulation poses a great challenge with unpredictable outcomes due to the absence of a true aneurysm neck and the presence of perforating vessels. In this article, we aim to compare endovascular treatment of unruptured posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms with stent-assisted coiling (SAC) and flow diversion (FD) in terms of occlusion rate and clinical outcomes. A systematic search of electronic databases from inception to August 2019 identified 484 articles for screening. After proper inclusion/exclusion criteria, 15 articles were included and data were extracted and analyzed using meta-analysis of proportions. The pooled cohort consisted of 430 aneurysms: 128 (29.7%) treated with SAC in 5 studies and 302 (70.3%) treated with FD in 11 studies. Complete/near-complete occlusion was achieved in 83% after FD (95% CI 0.75 to 0.90; I2=45%) and 84% after SAC (95% CI 0.72 to 0.91; I2=22%), with no significant difference between techniques (p=0.95). Periprocedural complications were observed in 18% after FD (95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; I2=0%) and 6% after SAC (95% CI 0.02 to 0.13; I2=0%); the subgroup analysis was statistically significant (p=0.008). Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was observed in favorable clinical outcomes between groups. These results suggest similar efficacy in occlusion rate and favorable clinical outcome for posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms treated with SAC and FD. Stroke was the most common complication regardless of treatment modality, and a lower periprocedural complication rate was noted with SAC. Further studies are needed with the primary focus of reducing the risk of stroke with either modality.

Download Full-text

Endovascular management of fusiform aneurysms in the posterior circulation: the era of flow diversion

Neurosurgical FOCUS ◽

10.3171/2017.3.focus1748 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 42 (6) ◽

pp. E14 ◽

Cited By ~ 34

Author(s):

Ahmed J. Awad ◽

Justin R. Mascitelli ◽

Reham R. Haroun ◽

Reade A. De Leacy ◽

Johanna T. Fifi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Natural History ◽

Endovascular Treatment ◽

Coil Embolization ◽

Posterior Circulation ◽

Flow Diversion ◽

Endovascular Management ◽

True Aneurysm ◽

Aneurysm Neck

Fusiform aneurysms are uncommon compared with their saccular counterparts, yet they remain very challenging to treat and are associated with high rates of rebleeding and morbidity. Lack of a true aneurysm neck renders simple clip reconstruction or coil embolization usually impossible, and more advanced techniques are required, including bypass, stent-assisted coiling, and, more recently, flow diversion. In this article, the authors review posterior circulation fusiform aneurysms, including pathogenesis, natural history, and endovascular treatment, including the role of flow diversion. In addition, the authors propose an algorithm for treatment based on their practice.

Download Full-text

Whether Intracranial Aneurysm Could Be Well Treated by Flow Diversion: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Large-Sample Studies including Anterior and Posterior Circulation

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2021/6637780 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 2021 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

Yingjin Wang ◽

Changwei Yuan ◽

Shengli Shen ◽

Liqing Xu ◽

Hongzhou Duan

Keyword(s):

Intracranial Aneurysm ◽

Event Rate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Safety Data ◽

Posterior Circulation ◽

Flow Diversion ◽

Complete Occlusion ◽

Large Sample ◽

Occlusion Rate

Background. Flow diversion (FD) has become a widely adopted treatment method for intracranial aneurysms in the clinic, but a comprehensive meta-analysis of large-sample studies including anterior and posterior circulation is still lacking. Methods. The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched between January 1, 2008, and December 1, 2019. A random-effect model was used to calculate the efficacy and safety data as well as 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results. The pooled sample size of all included studies was 6695 patients; the mean age was 55.5 years old, with a total of 7406 aneurysms. For efficacy, the complete occlusion rate in angiographic follow-up (AFU) at 6 months was 78% (95% CI, 0.77, 0.80), and the AFU rate at 6-12 months was 90% (95% CI, 0.88, 0.92). For safety, the hemorrhagic event rate was 2%, the ischemic event rate was 5%, and the mortality rate was 3%. Conclusion. FD is an effective and safe treatment for intracranial aneurysm with high complete occlusion rate and acceptable complication rate.

Download Full-text

Meta-analysis of treatment outcomes of posterior circulation non-saccular aneurysms by flow diverters

Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery ◽

10.1136/neurintsurg-2017-013312 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (5) ◽

pp. 493-499 ◽

Cited By ~ 33

Author(s):

Satoshi Kiyofuji ◽

Christopher S Graffeo ◽

Avital Perry ◽

Mohammad Hassan Murad ◽

Kelly D Flemming ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Meta Analysis ◽

Flow Diverter ◽

Posterior Circulation ◽

Flow Diversion ◽

Neurologic Outcome ◽

Periprocedural Stroke ◽

Flow Diverters ◽

Overall Mortality ◽

Saccular Aneurysms

IntroductionNon-saccular aneurysms of the posterior circulation are uncommon but highly dangerous lesions. Flow diverter stents have been demonstrated to be effective treatments of various anterior circulation aneurysms, particularly large and giant proximal internal carotid artery aneurysms. However, evidence regarding the treatment of non-saccular posterior circulation aneurysms with flow diverters is lacking.MethodsA systematic literature review of the English language literature since 2007 was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase. Keywords and MeSH terms included flow diversion, flow diverter, pipeline, surpass, intracranial aneurysm, vertebrobasilar, and non-saccular. Case reports were excluded. Angiographic and clinical outcomes were pooled using a random effects meta-analysis.Results13 retrospective non-comparative studies reporting 129 patients and 131 aneurysm treatments were included. The average number of flow diverters per aneurysm was 4.33. Immediate complete or near complete occlusion of the aneurysm occurred in 25% (95% CI 1% to 60%), and long term occlusion in 52% (29–76%). Periprocedural stroke occurred in 23% of cases. Good long term neurologic outcome (modified Rankin Scale score ≤2) was achieved in 51% (95% CI 31% to 71%). Overall mortality was 21% (95% CI 7% to 38%) and morbidity was 26% (12%–42%). Retreatment was required in 5% (95% CI 0% to 14%). Good neurologic outcome rate was higher in vertebral artery aneurysms (83%) than other locations (18–33%).ConclusionsFlow diversion is a feasible and efficacious treatment for non-saccular aneurysms in the posterior circulation. However, the intervention carries a significant risk of periprocedural stroke, and is still associated with high overall mortality. Further studies are needed to identify significant treatment risk factors and optimize patient selection.

Download Full-text

A meta-analysis indicating extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) as an alternative to longer implants (≥ 8 mm) with bone augmentation

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/s41598-021-87507-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Xiaoran Yu ◽

Ruogu Xu ◽

Zhengchuan Zhang ◽

Yang Yang ◽

Feilong Deng

Keyword(s):

Survival Rate ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Risk Of Bias ◽

Bone Augmentation ◽

Moderate Quality ◽

Short Implants ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Complications Rate

AbstractExtra-short implants, of which clinical outcomes remain controversial, are becoming a potential option rather than long implants with bone augmentation in atrophic partially or totally edentulous jaws. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and complications between extra-short implants (≤ 6 mm) and longer implants (≥ 8 mm), with and without bone augmentation procedures. Electronic (via PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) and manual searches were performed for articles published prior to November 2020. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing extra-short implants and longer implants in the same study reporting survival rate with an observation period at least 1 year were selected. Data extraction and methodological quality (AMSTAR-2) was assessed by 2 authors independently. A quantitative meta-analysis was performed to compare the survival rate, marginal bone loss (MBL), biological and prosthesis complication rate. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias tool 2 and the quality of evidence was determined with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. 21 RCTs were included, among which two were prior registered and 14 adhered to the CONSORT statement. No significant difference was found in the survival rate between extra-short and longer implant at 1- and 3-years follow-up (RR: 1.002, CI 0.981 to 1.024, P = 0.856 at 1 year; RR: 0.996, CI 0.968 to 1.025, P = 0.772 at 3 years, moderate quality), while longer implants had significantly higher survival rate than extra-short implants (RR: 0.970, CI 0.944 to 0.997, P < 0.05) at 5 years. Interestingly, no significant difference was observed when bone augmentations were performed at 5 years (RR: 0.977, CI 0.945 to 1.010, P = 0.171 for reconstructed bone; RR: 0.955, CI 0.912 to 0.999, P < 0.05 for native bone). Both the MBL (from implant placement) (WMD: − 0.22, CI − 0.277 to − 0.164, P < 0.01, low quality) and biological complications rate (RR: 0.321, CI 0.243 to 0.422, P < 0.01, moderate quality) preferred extra-short implants. However, there was no significant difference in terms of MBL (from prosthesis restoration) (WMD: 0.016, CI − 0.036 to 0.068, P = 0.555, moderate quality) or prosthesis complications rate (RR: 1.308, CI 0.893 to 1.915, P = 0.168, moderate quality). The placement of extra-short implants could be an acceptable alternative to longer implants in atrophic posterior arch. Further high-quality RCTs with a long follow-up period are required to corroborate the present outcomes.Registration number The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020155342).

Download Full-text

EXPRESS: Off-hour effect on time metrics and clinical outcomes in endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusion, a systematic review and meta-analysis

International Journal of Stroke ◽

10.1177/17474930211012545 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 174749302110125

Author(s):

Mingming Zha ◽

Qingwen Yang ◽

Shuo Liu ◽

Min Wu ◽

Kangmo Huang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Endovascular Treatment ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Working Hours ◽

Good Prognosis ◽

Large Vessel ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Large Vessel Occlusion ◽

Vessel Occlusion ◽

Significant Difference

Background There is an ongoing debate on the off-hour effect on endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute large vessel occlusion (LVO). Aims This meta-analysis aimed to compare time metrics and clinical outcomes of acute LVO patients who presented/were treated during off-hour with those during working hours. Summary of review Structured searches on the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were conducted through February 23rd, 2021. The primary outcomes were onset to door, door to imaging, door to puncture, puncture to recanalization, procedural time, successful recanalization, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH), mortality in hospital, good prognosis (90-day modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 0-2), and 90-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were imaging to puncture, onset to puncture, onset to recanalization, door to recanalization time, mRS 0-2 at discharge, and consecutive 90-day mRS score. The odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) of the outcomes were calculated using random-effect models. Heterogenicity and publication bias were analyzed. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted as appropriate. Nineteen studies published between 2014 and 2021 with a total of 14185 patients were eligible for quantitative synthesis. Patients in the off-hour group were significantly younger than those in the on-hour group and with comparable stroke severity and intravenous thrombolysis rate. The off-hour group had longer onset to door (WMD [95%CI], 12.83 [1.84-23.82] min), door to puncture (WMD [95%CI], 11.45 [5.93-16.97] min), imaging to puncture (WMD [95%CI], 10.39 [4.61-16.17] min), onset to puncture (WMD [95%CI], 25.30 [13.11-37.50] min), onset to recanalization (WMD [95%CI], 25.16 [10.28-40.04] min), and door to recanalization (WMD [95%CI], 18.02 [10.01-26.03] min) time. Significantly lower successful recanalization rate (OR [95%CI], 0.85 [0.76-0.95]; P=0.004; I2=0%) was detected in the off-hour group. No significant difference was noted regarding SICH and prognosis. But a trend towards lower OR of good prognosis was witnessed in the off-hour group (OR [95%CI], 0.92 [0.84-1.01]; P=0.084; I2=0%). Conclusions Patients who presented/were treated during off-hour were associated with excessive delays before the initiation of EVT, lower successful reperfusion rate, and a trend towards worse prognosis when compared with working hours. Optimizing the workflows of EVT during off-hour is needed.

Download Full-text

Abstract 126: Comparison of Flow Diversion and Coiling in Large Unruptured Intracranial Saccular Aneurysms

Stroke ◽

10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.126 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 45 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

Nohra Chalouhi ◽

Stavropoula Tjoumakaris ◽

Robert M Starke ◽

L Fernando Gonzalez ◽

Ciro Randazzo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Multivariable Analysis ◽

Flow Diversion ◽

Similar Proportion ◽

Anterior Communicating Artery ◽

Patient Age ◽

Aneurysm Size ◽

Patient Âgé ◽

Complete Obliteration ◽

Saccular Aneurysms

Background and purpose: Flow diversion has emerged as an important tool for management of intracranial aneurysms. The purpose of this study was to compare flow diversion and traditional embolization strategies in terms of safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes in patients with unruptured, large saccular aneurysms (≥ 10 mm). Methods: Forty patients treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) were matched in a 1:3 fashion with 120 patients treated with coiling based on patient age and aneurysm size. Fusiform and anterior communicating artery aneurysms were eliminated from the analysis. Procedural complications, angiographic results, and clinical outcomes were analyzed and compared. Results: There were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of patient age, gender, aneurysm size, and aneurysm location. The rate of procedure-related complications did not differ between the PED (7.5%) and the coil group (7.5% p=1). At the latest follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of aneurysms treated with PED (86%) achieved complete obliteration compared to coiled aneurysms (41%, p<0.001). In multivariable analysis, coiling was an independent predictor of nonocclusion. Retreatment was necessary in fewer patients in the PED group (2.8%) than the coil group (37%, p<0.001). A similar proportion of patients attained a favorable outcome (mRS 0-2) in the PED group (92%) and the coil group (94%, p=0.8). Conclusion: The PED provides higher aneurysm occlusion rates than coiling, with no additional morbidity and similar clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that the PED is a preferred treatment option for large unruptured saccular aneurysms.

Download Full-text

Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Spine Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.1101/2021.07.04.21259978 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Kanthika Wasinpongwanich ◽

Tanawin Nopsopon ◽

Krit Pongpirul

Keyword(s):

Lumbar Spine ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Risk Ratio ◽

Literature Search ◽

Operative Time ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Fusion Rate ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Spine Diseases

Purpose Surgical treatment is mandatory in some patients with lumbar spine diseases. To obtain spine fusion, many operative techniques were developed with different fusion rates and clinical results. This study aimed to collect randomized controlled trial (RCT) data to compare fusion rate, clinical outcomes, complications among Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF), and other techniques for lumbar spine diseases. Methods A systematic literature search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases was searched for studies up to 13 February 2020. The meta-analysis was done using a random-effects model. Pooled risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval of fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and complication in TLIF and other techniques for lumbar diseases. Results The literature search identified 3,682 potential studies, 15 RCTs (915 patients) were met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to other techniques, TLIF had slightly lower fusion rate (RR=0.84 [95% CI 0.72, 0.97], p=0.02, I2=0.0%) at 1-year follow-up while there was no difference on fusion rate at 2-year follow up (RR=1.06 [95% CI 0.96, 1.18], p=0.27, I2=69.0%). The estimated risk ratio of total adverse events (RR=0.90 [95% CI 0.59, 1.38], p=0.63, I2=0.0%) and revision rate (RR=0.78 [95%CI 0.34, 1.79], p=0.56, I2=39.0%) showed no difference. TLIF had approximately half an hour more operative time than other techniques (MD=31.88 [95% CI 5.33, 58.44], p=0.02, I2=92.0%). There was no significant difference between TLIF and other techniques in terms of the blood loss, and clinical outcomes. Conclusions Besides fusion rate at 1-year follow-up and operative time, our study demonstrated similar outcomes of TLIF with other techniques for lumbar diseases in regard to fusion rate, clinical outcomes, and complications.

Download Full-text

Abstract 12022: Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Everolimus-Eluting Stents versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of 14 Randomized Control Trials, Focused on Stent Thrombosis

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.130.suppl_2.12022 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽

Author(s):

TOSHIAKI TOYOTA ◽

Hiroki Shiomi ◽

Takeshi Morimoto ◽

Takeshi Kimura

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Stent Thrombosis ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Target Lesion ◽

Pooled Analysis ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Artery Disease

Background: We sought to compare the long-term clinical outcomes between everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) with a meta-analysis method. The long-term clinical outcomes, especially stent thrombosis (ST), after EES versus SES implantation has not been clearly defined among trials directly comparing the 2 types of stents. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane database, and ClinicalTrials.gov. for trials comparing outcomes between EES (Xience V/Promus) and SES (Cypher select/Cypher select plus) in patients with native coronary artery disease using randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. We selected the article reporting the longest follow-up outcomes from each RCT. The outcome measure was all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite ST, and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). ST was further classified as those occurring early (<=30 days), late (30-365 days), or very late (<365 days). Results: We identified 14 RCT comparing EES and SES including 2 trials reporting the longest follow-up outcomes as a pooled analysis. We analyzed 13,434 randomly assigned patients with the weighted follow-up period of 2.1 years (Follow-up <=1-year: 7 trials, and 3191 patients; >1-year: 7 trials, and 10243 patients). EES as compared to SES was associated with significantly lower risks for overall ST, and early ST (pooled odds ratio (OR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.81, P=0.01, and OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.99, P=0.046, respectively), while there was no significant difference in the risk for late ST and very late ST (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.17-1.43, P=0.19, and OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.23-1.85, P=0.43, respectively). EES as compared to SES was also associated with significantly lower risks for TLR (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71-0.99, P=0.04). There was no significant difference in the risk for all-cause death, and MI between EES and SES. (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78-1.07, P=0.11, and OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75-1.13, P=0.44, respectively). Conclusions: In the current meta-analysis of 14 RCT directly comparing EES with SES, implantation of EES as compared to SES implantation was associated with significantly lower risk for definite ST and TLR.

Download Full-text

Outcome Differences of Remnant- Preserving versus Non-Preserving Methods in Arthroscopic Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis with Subgroup analysis

Knee Surgery and Related Research ◽

10.1186/s43019-019-0017-z ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 32 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Sung Hun Won ◽

Byung-Il Lee ◽

Su Yeon Park ◽

Kyung-Dae Min ◽

Jun-Bum Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Acl Reconstruction ◽

Subgroup Analysis ◽

Observational Studies ◽

Ligament Reconstruction ◽

Cruciate Ligament ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Lachman Test ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Anterior Cruciate

Abstract Purpose To analyze differences in clinical outcomes of arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction between remnant-preserving and non-preserving methods. Methods International electronical databases PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane central database from January 1966 to December 2017 were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared differences of clinical outcomes of ACL reconstruction with and without remnant preservation. A meta-analysis of these studies was performed to compare clinical outcomes. Subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the role of methodological quality in primary meta-analysis estimates. Results Five RCTs and six observational studies were included in this meta-analysis and subgroup analysis. The remnant-preserving method in arthroscopic ACL reconstruction showed a statistically significant difference compared to the non-preserving method regarding arthrometric evaluation (side-to-side difference). Lachman test, Lysholm scores, and IKDC subjective scores showed statistically minor difference in meta-analysis, but showed no significant difference in subgroup analysis. Remained parameters including pivot shift test, IKDC grades, incidence of cyclops lesion showed no statistically differences in meta-analysis or subgroup analysis. Conclusions This meta-analysis with subgroup analysis showed that arthroscopic remnant-preserving ACL reconstruction provided statistically significant but limited clinical relevance in terms of arthrometric evaluation. Results of Lachman test, Lysholm scores, and IKDC subjective scores demonstrated statistically minor differences.

Download Full-text

Ten-year analysis of saccular aneurysms in the Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial

Journal of Neurosurgery ◽

10.3171/2018.8.jns181846 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 132 (3) ◽

pp. 771-776 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Robert F. Spetzler ◽

Cameron G. McDougall ◽

Joseph M. Zabramski ◽

Felipe C. Albuquerque ◽

Nancy K. Hills ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Artery Aneurysm ◽

Ruptured Aneurysm ◽

Outcome Analysis ◽

Final Report ◽

Clinical Trial Registration ◽

Poor Outcome ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Saccular Aneurysms

OBJECTIVEThe authors present the 10-year results of the Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial (BRAT) for saccular aneurysms. The 1-, 3-, and 6-year results of the trial have been previously reported, as have the 6-year results with respect to saccular aneurysms. This final report comparing the safety and efficacy of clipping versus coiling is limited to an analysis of those patients presenting with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) from a ruptured saccular aneurysm.METHODSIn the study, 362 patients had saccular aneurysms and were randomized equally to the clipping and the coiling cohorts (181 each). The primary outcome analysis was based on the assigned treatment group; poor outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score > 2 and was independently adjudicated. The extent of aneurysm obliteration was adjudicated by a nontreating neuroradiologist.RESULTSThere was no statistically significant difference in poor outcome (mRS score > 2) or deaths between these 2 treatment arms during the 10 years of follow-up. Of 178 clip-assigned patients with saccular aneurysms, 1 (< 1%) was crossed over to coiling, and 64 (36%) of the 178 coil-assigned patients were crossed over to clipping. After the initial hospitalization, 2 of 241 (0.8%) clipped saccular aneurysms and 23 of 115 (20%) coiled saccular aneurysms required retreatment (p < 0.001). At the 10-year follow-up, 93% (50/54) of the clipped aneurysms were completely obliterated, compared with only 22% (5/23) of the coiled aneurysms (p < 0.001). Two patients had documented rebleeding, both died, and both were in the assigned and treated coiled cohort (2/83); no patient in the clipped cohort (0/175) died (p = 0.04). In 1 of these 2 patients, the hemorrhage was not from the target aneurysm but from an incidental basilar artery aneurysm, which was coiled at the same time.CONCLUSIONSThere was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the 2 assigned treatment groups as measured by mRS outcomes or deaths. Clinical outcomes in the patients with posterior circulation aneurysms were better in the coiling group at 1 year, but after 1 year this difference was no longer statistically significant. Rates of complete aneurysm obliteration and rates of retreatment favored patients who actually underwent clipping compared with those who underwent coiling.Clinical trial registration no.: NCT01593267 (clinicaltrials.gov)

Download Full-text