Artikel
Natural history and treatment outcomes of ruptured and unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms – 1-year results from the giant intracranial aneurysm registry
Suche in Medline nach
Autoren
Veröffentlicht: | 18. Juni 2018 |
---|
Gliederung
Text
Objective: Giant intracranial aneurysms (GIA) are known for the highest risk of rupture and the highest mortality rates of all intracranial aneurysms. Since GIA are a rare disease condition, there is limited evidence on them. We aim to examine the natural history and treatment outcomes of ruptured (rGIA) and unruptured GIA (uGIA).
Methods: The GIA registry is a prospective multicenter observational study exclusively focusing on GIA, which are defined as intracranial aneurysms with a diameter of at least 25 mm. Patients with rGIA and uGIA admitted to one of the 32 participating centers in Europe, Japan and the US were included. We present 1-year results for rupture rates and survival during the course of the natural history and for outcomes of surgical and endovascular management.
Results: Between December 2008 and February 2017, we included 362 subjects with 300 (82.9%) uGIA and 62 (17.1%) rGIA. Surgical management of rGIA / uGIA was performed in 33.9% / 30.0%, endovascular management in 38.7% / 48.0% and the natural history was followed in 27.4% / 22.0%, respectively. During the natural history of uGIA, we observed 1-year rupture rates of 21.6% for the entire cohort and 25.3% after exclusion of uGIA at the cavernous ICA. 1-year survival rates during the natural history of rGIA / uGIA was 0.0% / 78.0%. Significantly higher 1-year survival rates were found after endovascular (rGIA: 61.0% / uGIA: 88.0%) or surgical management (rGIA: 64.0% / uGIA: 97.0%). In rGIA, 1-year survival was associated with WFNS, GCS, mRS and the presence of cranial nerve deficits at baseline. In uGIA, the hazard ratio (HR) for death for 1 year in subjects between 65-74 years was 5.1 (95% CI: 1.4-19.0) and that of subjects older than 74 ears was 7.6 (95% CI: 2.0-28.4; p<0.01) compared to subjects younger than 55 years. HR for death for 1 year in subjects with posterior circulation GIA was 6.7 (95% CI: 1.5-30.4; p<0.01) with patients with GIA located at the non-cavernous ICA as reference. There was no statistically significant association between uGIA size and 1-year mortality.
Conclusion: In our patient cohort, the natural history of uGIA at 1 year of follow-up produced rupture rates of 25.3% and a 21.6% mortality rate. Already within the first year of follow-up, outcomes of endovascular or surgical management were significantly superior compared to the natural history, both for rGIA and uGIA. The risk of death at 1 year in uGIA was highest in patients older than 65 years with posterior circulation GIA.