-
Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Clinical and radiological outcome after treatment of unruptured paraophthalmic internal carotid artery aneurysms: A comparative and pooled analysis of single-center experiences.
- Yu Zhu, Jianwei Pan, Jian Shen, Chen Liu, Zuoxu Fan, Yi Shen, Liang Wen, Ying Tong, and Renya Zhan.
- Department of Neurosurgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, China.
- World Neurosurg. 2015 Dec 1; 84 (6): 1726-38.
ObjectiveUnruptured paraophthalmic aneurysms present unique challenges, and the ideal management remains unknown.MethodsWe performed a pooled analysis of single-center experiences to compare the risks and effectiveness involving patients with unruptured paraophthalmic aneurysms treated with clipping, coiling alone, stent-assisted coiling, and flow-diversion. The MEDLINE database was searched and thirty-three series (including our institutional experience) were included.ResultsClipping caused more intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and neurologic complications (NCs) than coiling alone (ICH: odds ratio [OR] = 3.058, P = 0.013; NC: OR = 5.809, P < 0.001), stent-assisted coiling (ICH: P = 0.018; NC: OR = 7.367, P < 0.001), and flow-diversion (ICH: P = 0.006; NC: OR = 16.954, P < 0.001). Clipping also caused more unfavorable visual outcomes than both coiling alone (OR = 3.037, P = 0.001) and stent-assisted coiling (OR = 6.055, P = 0.005). Clipping resulted in a lower reoperation rate than coiling alone in large/giant aneurysm group, which approached statistical significance (OR = 0.133, P = 0.057). Clipping, stent-assisted coiling, and flow-diversion all showed higher occlusion rates compared with coiling alone (OR [clipping vs. coiling alone] = 2.852, P ≤ 0.001; OR [coiling alone vs. stent-assisted coiling] = 0.302, P = 0.003; OR [coiling alone vs. flow-diversion] = 0.400, P = 0.013). Flow-diversion showed comparative complication rate, clinical outcomes, and angiographic result compared with stent-assisted coiling. No significant differences were found among all 4 treatment modalities on mortality and poor outcome.ConclusionsEndovascular therapies have benefits over surgical clipping in terms of fewer intracranial hemorrhage complications, fewer NCs, and lower unfavorable visual outcome rate. Flow diversion showed comparative safety and effectiveness to stent-assisted coiling, and they both achieved better radiologic results than coiling alone. Further validation by randomized cohort studies is still needed to provide robust evidence.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.