Clinical analysis of giant intracranial aneurysms with endovascular embolization

Endosaccular Treatment of Very Large and Giant Intracranial Aneurysms with Parent Artery Preservation : Single Center Experience with Long Term Follow-up

Objective

Very large (20–25 mm) and giant (≥25 mm) intracranial aneurysms have an extremely poor natural course, and treatment of these aneurysms remains a challenge for endovascular and surgical strategies. This study was undertaken to describe our experiences of endosaccular treatment of very large and giant intracranial aneurysms with parent artery preservation.

Methods

From January 2005 to October 2016, twenty-four very large or giant aneurysms in 24 patients were treated by endosaccular coil embolization with parent artery preservation. Nine (37.5%) aneurysms were ruptured and 15 were unruptured, and of these 15, 11 were symptomatic cases and 4 were incidentally discovered. The cohort comprised 17 women and 7 men of mean age 58.5 years (range, 26–82). Mean aneurysm size was 26.0 mm (range, 20–39) and 13 of the 24 aneurysms were giant.

Results

Immediate angiographic results were complete occlusion in nine (37.5%) cases, remnant neck in six (25.0%), and remnant sac in nine (37.5%). Overall procedural related morbidity and mortality rates were 12.5% and 4.2%, respectively. Angiographic follow-up was available in 16 patients (66.7%). Mean and median follow-up periods were 27.2 (range, 2–77) and 10.5 months, respectively. In 12 cases (12/16, 75%) stable occlusion was achieved, four cases (4/16, 25%) had recanalized, and two of these were retreated with additional coiling. At clinical follow-up of the nine ruptured cases, three patients (33.3%) achieved a good clinical outcome (Glasgow outcome scale [GOS] score of 4 or 5), two (22.2%) a poor outcome (GOS score of 2 or 3), and four patients (44.4%) expired (GOS 1). On the other hand, of the 15 unruptured cases, 13 patients (86.7%) achieved a good clinical outcome (GOS 4 or 5), one patient a poor outcome (GOS score of 2 or 3), and one patient expired (GOS 1).

Conclusion

The present study shows endosaccular treatment of very large or giant intracranial aneurysms with parent artery preservation is both feasible and effective with acceptable morbidity and mortality.

Endovascular treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms

PURPOSE

Complex intracranial aneurysms (CIA) are heterogenous group of intracranial vascular malformations. Due to its giant size, difficult location, broad neck, branches arising from the aneurysm, wall structure, calcification, presence of intraluminal thrombus or previous treatments it requires more careful approach. The aim of this study was to evaluate endovascular treatment results of CIA in our Department.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In order to differentiate CIA from all the aneurysms, treated endovascularly in years 2008-2014, authors proposed their own qualification criteria. Additionally, subgroup of patients with CIA with simultaneous subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) was divided. Clinical outcomes of patients were assessed with Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS), while radiological outcomes were assessed with Montreal Scale. Aneurysm localization, incidence of aborted procedures, intraoperative complications were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Internal carotid artery was the most common localization in both CIA and non-complex (nCIA) groups. Incidence of aborted procedures was significantly higher in CIA group than in nCIA (25% vs. 7%; p < 0.01). CIA group had worse Montreal scores then nCIA group (1.90 vs. 1.49; p < 0.01). Clinical outcome in GOS scale in patients with SAH and CIA was significantly worse than in SAH and nCIA (2.86 vs. 4.06; p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

To conclude, proposed criteria of CIA should be taken into consideration during diagnosis and qualification to invasive treatment. Classifying aneurysm as CIA is related to greater possibility of aborting endovascular procedure due to technical difficulties.

Outcome of Surgical or Endovascular Treatment of Giant Intracranial Aneurysms, with Emphasis on Age, Aneurysm Location, and Unruptured Aneuryms - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Designing treatment strategies for unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms (GIA) is difficult as evidence of large clinical trials is lacking. We examined the outcome following surgical or endovascular GIA treatment focusing on patient age, GIA location and unruptured GIA. Methods: Medline and Embase were searched for studies reporting on GIA treatment outcome published after January 2000. We calculated the proportion of good outcome (PGO) for all included GIA and for unruptured GIA by meta-analysis using a random effects model. Results: We included 54 studies containing 64 study populations with 1,269 GIA at a median follow-up time (FU-T) of 26.4 months (95% CI 10.8-42.0). PGO was 80.9% (77.4-84.4) in the analysis of all GIA compared to 81.2% (75.3-86.1) in the separate analysis of unruptured GIA. For each year added to patient age, PGO decreased by 0.8%, both for all GIA and unruptured GIA. For all GIA, surgical treatment resulted in a PGO of 80.3% (95% CI 76.0-84.6) compared to 84.2% (78.5-89.8, p = 0.27) after endovascular treatment. In unruptured GIA, PGO was 79.7% (95% CI 71.5-87.8) after surgical treatment and 84.9% (79.1-90.7, p = 0.54) after endovascular treatment. PGO was lower in high quality studies and in studies presenting aggregate instead of individual patient data. In unruptured GIA, the OR for good treatment outcome was 5.2 (95% CI 2.0-13.0) at the internal carotid artery compared to 0.1 (0.1-0.3, p < 0.1) in the posterior circulation. Patient sex, FU-T and prevalence of ruptured GIA were not associated with PGO. Conclusions: We found that the chances of good outcome after surgical or endovascular GIA treatment mainly depend on patient age and aneurysm location rather than on the type of treatment conducted. Our analysis may inform future research on GIA.