• Isaac Josh Abecassis, Qazi Zeeshan, Basavaraj V Ghodke, Michael R Levitt, Richard G Ellenbogen, and Laligam N Sekhar.
• Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
• World Neurosurg. 2020 Apr 1; 136: 17-27.

AbstractIdeal management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) and ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs) is a controversial issue. Over the last few decades, a significant paradigm shift has occurred away from open microsurgical clipping toward endovascular coil embolization. Multiple studies have been performed with mixed results. Some studies suggest that endovascular treatment produces better clinical and functional outcomes, but is associated with increased need for retreatment. Other studies report increased durability in aneurysms treated with microsurgical clipping, but that clipping may be associated with worse functional outcomes in some cases. Further complicating the dialogue are variable costs associated with different treatment modalities, including country-dependent cost differences. Here we provide a review of some of the major studies comparing open surgery versus endovascular treatment for both RIAs and UIAs to distill their key findings and corresponding implications for clinical practice. We relate these research results to our institution's experience with RIAs and UIAs and describe our approach to treatment of these conditions. Finally, we discuss implications of the paradigm shift for both open and endovascular surgery, including educational initiatives directed toward preserving important microsurgical tenets in the setting of diminishing surgical volume.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

20 keywords...

hide…