Angiographic results of surgical or endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and inter-observer reliability study

Endovascular Parent Vessel Occlusion Versus Flow Diversion in the Treatment of Large and Giant Aneurysms: A Randomized Comparison

OBJECTIVE

Parent vessel occlusion (PVO) is a time-honored treatment for unclippable or uncoilable intracranial aneurysms. Flow diversion (FD) is a recent endovascular alternative that can occlude the aneurysm and spare the parent blood vessel. Our aim was to compare outcomes of FD with endovascular PVO.

METHODS

This is a prespecified treatment subgroup analysis of the Flow diversion in Intracranial Aneurysms trial (FIAT). FIAT was an investigator-led parallel-group all-inclusive pragmatic randomized trial. For each patient, clinicians had to prespecify an alternative management option to FD before stratified randomization. We report all patients for whom PVO was selected as the best alternative treatment to FD. The primary outcome was a composite of core-lab determined angiographic occlusion or near-occlusion at 3-12 months combined with an independent clinical outcome (mRS<3). Primary analyses were intent-to-treat. There was no blinding.

RESULTS

There were 45 patients (16.2% of the 278 FIAT patients randomized between 2011 and 2020 in 3 centers): 22 were randomly allocated to FD and 23 to PVO. Aneurysms were mainly large or giant (mean 22 mm) anterior circulation (mainly carotid) aneurysms. A poor primary outcome was reached in 11/22 FD (50.0%) compared to 9/23 PVO patients (39.1%) (RR: 1.28, 95% CI [0.66-2.47]; P = 0.466). Morbidity (mRS >2) at 1 year occurred in 4/22 FD and 6/23 PVO patients. Angiographic results and serious adverse events were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparison between PVO and FD was inconclusive. More randomized trials are needed to better determine the role of FD in large aneurysms eligible for PVO.

A Pragmatic Randomized Trial Comparing Surgical Clipping and Endovascular Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Surgical clipping and endovascular treatment are commonly used in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms. We compared the safety and efficacy of the 2 treatments in a randomized trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clipping or endovascular treatments were randomly allocated to patients with one or more 3- to 25-mm unruptured intracranial aneurysms judged treatable both ways by participating physicians. The study hypothesized that clipping would decrease the incidence of treatment failure from 13% to 4%, a composite primary outcome defined as failure of aneurysm occlusion, intracranial hemorrhage during follow-up, or residual aneurysms at 1 year, as adjudicated by a core lab. Safety outcomes included new neurologic deficits following treatment, hospitalization of >5 days, and overall morbidity and mortality (mRS > 2) at 1 year. There was no blinding.

RESULTS

Two hundred ninety-one patients were enrolled from 2010 to 2020 in 7 centers. The 1-year primary outcome, ascertainable in 290/291 (99%) patients, was reached in 13/142 (9%; 95% CI, 5%-15%) patients allocated to surgery and in 28/148 (19%; 95% CI, 13%-26%) patients allocated to endovascular treatments (relative risk: 2.07; 95% CI, 1.12-3.83; P = .021). Morbidity and mortality (mRS >2) at 1 year occurred in 3/143 and 3/148 (2%; 95% CI, 1%-6%) patients allocated to surgery and endovascular treatments, respectively. Neurologic deficits (32/143, 22%; 95% CI, 16%-30% versus 19/148, 12%; 95% CI, 8%-19%; relative risk: 1.74; 95% CI, 1.04-2.92; P = .04) and hospitalizations beyond 5 days (69/143, 48%; 95% CI, 40%-56% versus 12/148, 8%; 95% CI, 5%-14%; relative risk: 0.18; 95% CI, 0.11-0.31; P < .001) were more frequent after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical clipping is more effective than endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in terms of the frequency of the primary outcome of treatment failure. Results were mainly driven by angiographic results at 1 year.

Stent-Assisted Coiling in the Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Stent-assisted coiling may improve angiographic results of endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms compared with coiling alone, but this has never been shown in a randomized trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Stenting in the Treatment of Aneurysm Trial was an investigator-led, parallel, randomized (1:1) trial conducted in 4 university hospitals. Patients with intracranial aneurysms at risk of recurrence, defined as large aneurysms (≥10 mm), postcoiling recurrent aneurysms, or small aneurysms with a wide neck (≥4 mm), were randomly allocated to stent-assisted coiling or coiling alone. The composite primary efficacy outcome was "treatment failure," defined as initial failure to treat the aneurysm; aneurysm rupture or retreatment during follow-up; death or dependency (mRS > 2); or an angiographic residual aneurysm adjudicated by an independent core laboratory at 12 months. The primary hypothesis (revised for slow accrual) was that stent-assisted coiling would decrease treatment failures from 33% to 15%, requiring 200 patients. Primary analyses were intent to treat.

RESULTS

Of 205 patients recruited between 2011 and 2021, ninety-four were allocated to stent-assisted coiling and 111 to coiling alone. The primary outcome, ascertainable in 203 patients, was reached in 28/93 patients allocated to stent-assisted coiling (30.1%; 95% CI, 21.2%-40.6%) compared with 30/110 (27.3%; 95% CI, 19.4%-36.7%) allocated to coiling alone (relative risk = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.7-1.7; P  = .66). Poor clinical outcomes (mRS >2) occurred in 8/94 patients allocated to stent-assisted coiling (8.5%; 95% CI, 4.0%-16.6%) compared with 6/111 (5.4%; 95% CI, 2.2%-11.9%) allocated to coiling alone (relative risk = 1.6; 95% CI, 0.6%-4.4%; P  = .38).

CONCLUSIONS

The STAT trial did not show stent-assisted coiling to be superior to coiling alone for wide-neck, large, or recurrent unruptured aneurysms.

Flow Diversion in the Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Pragmatic Randomized Care Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Flow diversion is a recent endovascular treatment for intracranial aneurysms. We compared the safety and efficacy of flow diversion with the alternative standard management options.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A parallel group, prerandomized, controlled, open-label pragmatic trial was conducted in 3 Canadian centers. The trial included all patients considered for flow diversion. A Web-based platform 1:1 randomly allocated patients to flow diversion or 1 of 4 alternative standard management options (coiling with/without stent placement, parent vessel occlusion, surgical clipping, or observation) as prespecified by clinical judgment. Patients ineligible for alternative standard management options were treated with flow diversion in a registry. The primary safety outcome was death or dependency (mRS > 2) at 3 months. The composite primary efficacy outcome included the core lab-determined angiographic presence of a residual aneurysm, aneurysm rupture, progressive mass effect during follow-up, or death or dependency (mRS > 2) at 3-12 months.

RESULTS

Between May 2011 and November 2020, three hundred twenty-three patients were recruited: Two hundred seventy-eight patients (86%) had treatment randomly allocated (139 to flow diversion and 139 to alternative standard management options), and 45 (14%) received flow diversion in the registry. Patients in the randomized trial frequently had unruptured (83%), large (52% ≥10 mm) carotid (64%) aneurysms. Death or dependency at 3 months occurred in 16/138 patients who underwent flow diversion and 12/137 patients receiving alternative standard management options (relative risk, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.65-2.69; P = .439). A poor primary efficacy outcome was found in 30.9% (43/139) with flow diversion and 45.6% (62/136) of patients receiving alternative standard management options, with an absolute risk difference of 14.7% (95% CI, 3.3%-26.0%; relative risk, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.92; P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with mostly unruptured, large, anterior circulation (carotid) aneurysms, flow diversion was more effective than the alternative standard management option in terms of angiographic outcome.

Understanding the reliability of trial outcome measures: The example of angiographic results of surgical or endovascular treatments of aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The reliability of outcome measures is of central importance in clinical research. Studies of reliability remain rare in the neurovascular field.

METHODS

A narrative review of the history (1997-2021) of reporting angiographic results of the surgical or endovascular treatments of aneurysms serves to illustrate the importance of precisely defining outcome measures. We also review how the reliability of an angiographic classification system was studied.

DISCUSSION

Outcome measures are commonly used without precise definitions. When definitions or classification systems exist, they are rarely verified for their reliability. Twenty-five years following its introduction, a classification of angiographic results of aneurysm treatments is still being studied and modified.

CONCLUSION

The reliability of outcome measures should be made a research priority if we are to practice outcome-based medical or surgical care.

Retreatment of Residual and Recurrent Aneurysms After Embolization With the Woven EndoBridge Device: Multicenter Case Series

BACKGROUND

The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device (Terumno Corp. [parent company of Microvention]) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as the first intrasaccular device for intracranial aneurysm treatment in December 2018. Its use has become more common since then, but both trial results and postmarket experiences have raised questions about the efficacy in achieving complete aneurysm obliteration. Retreatment after WEB embolization has not been extensively discussed.

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the incidence and retreatment of aneurysms after initial WEB embolization.

METHODS

Retrospective review across 13 institutions identified all occurrences of WEB retreatment within neurovascular databases. Details regarding demographics, aneurysm characteristics, treatment considerations, clinical outcomes, and aneurysm occlusion were obtained and analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty aneurysms were retreated in 30 patients in a cohort of 342 WEB-treated aneurysms. The retreatment rate was 8.8%. Endovascular methods were used for 23 cases, and 7 were treated surgically. Two aneurysms presented with rehemorrhage after initial WEB embolization. Endovascular treatments included stent-assisted coiling (12), flow diversion (7), coiling (2), PulseRider (Johnson & Johnson)-assisted coiling (1), and additional WEB placement (1). Surgical treatments included primary clipping (6) and Hunterian ligation (1). There were no major complications within the study group.

CONCLUSION

WEB retreatments were successfully performed by a variety of techniques, including stent-assisted coiling, clipping, and flow diversion as the most common. These procedures were performed safely with subsequent obliteration of most aneurysms. The potential need for retreatment of aneurysms should be considered during primary WEB treatments.

Middle Cerebral Artery Aneurysm Trial (MCAAT): A randomized care trial comparing surgical and endovascular management of MCA aneurysm patients

BACKGROUND

Whether the best management of middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysm patients is surgical or endovascular remains uncertain, with little evidence to guide decision-making. A randomized care trial offering MCA aneurysm patients a 50% chance of surgical and a 50% chance of endovascular management may optimize outcomes in the presence of uncertainty.

METHODS

The Middle Cerebral Artery Aneurysm Trial (MCAAT) is an investigator-initiated, multi-center, parallel group, prospective, 1:1 randomized controlled clinical trial. All adult patients with MCA aneurysms, ruptured or unruptured, amenable to surgical and endovascular treatment can be included. The composite primary outcome is 'Treatment Success': i) occlusion or exclusion of the aneurysm using the allocated treatment modality; ii) no intracranial hemorrhage during follow-up; iii) no retreatment of the target aneurysm during follow-up, iv) no residual aneurysm on angiographic follow-up and v) independence (mRS <3) at 1 year. The trial tests two versions of the same hypothesis (one for ruptured and one for unruptured MCA aneurysm patients): Surgical management will lead to a 15% absolute increase in the proportion of patients reaching Treatment Success from 55% to 70% (ruptured) or from 75% to 90% (unruptured aneurysm patients) compared to endovascular treatment (any method). In this pragmatic trial, outcome evaluations are by treating physicians, except for 1 year angiographic results which will be core lab assessed. The trial will be monitored by an independent data safety monitoring committee to assure safety of participants. MCAAT is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT05161377.

CONCLUSION

Patients with MCA aneurysms can be optimally managed within a care trial protocol.

Noninvasive Angiographic Results of Clipped or Coiled Intracranial Aneurysms: An Inter- and Intraobserver Reliability Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Noninvasive angiography is commonly used to assess the outcome of surgical or endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms in clinical series or randomized trials. We sought to assess whether a standardized 3-grade classification system could be reliably used to compare the CTA and MRA results of both treatments.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic portfolio composed of CTAs of 30 clipped and MRAs of 30 coiled aneurysms was independently evaluated by 24 raters of diverse experience and training backgrounds. Twenty raters performed a second evaluation 1 month later. Raters were asked which angiographic grade and management decision (retreatment; close or long-term follow-up) would be most appropriate for each case. Agreement was analyzed using the Krippendorff α (α_K) statistic, and the relationship between angiographic grade and clinical management choice, using the Fisher exact and Cramer V tests.

RESULTS

Interrater agreement was substantial (α_K = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.55-0.70); results were slightly better for MRA results of coiling (α_K = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.76) than for CTA results of clipping (α_K = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.69). Intrarater agreement was substantial to almost perfect. Interrater agreement regarding clinical management was moderate for both clipped (α_K = 0.49; 95% CI, 0.32-0.61) and coiled subgroups (α_K = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.34-0.54). The choice of clinical management was strongly associated with the size of the residuum (mean Cramer V = 0.77 [SD, 0.14]), but complete occlusions (grade 1) were followed more closely after coiling than after clipping (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

A standardized 3-grade scale was found to be a reliable and clinically meaningful tool to compare the results of clipping and coiling of aneurysms using CTA or MRA.