S C Johnston1, R A Dudley, D R Gress, L Ono. 1. Department of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco 94143-0114, USA. clayj@itsa.ucsf.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare complications of surgical clipping and coil embolization in the treatment of unruptured aneurysms. BACKGROUND: Surgical clipping has been the preferred treatment for unruptured cerebral aneurysms but endovascular coil embolization is an increasingly employed alternative. No direct comparisons of the techniques are available to guide clinical decision making. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of patients treated for unruptured cerebral aneurysms at 60 university hospitals from January 1994 through June 1997 using the University HealthSystem Consortium database. The database was validated by chart review from one of the participant universities. The main outcome measures were in-hospital mortality and adverse outcomes, defined as in-hospital deaths and discharges to nursing homes or rehabilitation hospitals. RESULTS: The primary treatment modality was surgical in 2,357 cases and endovascular in 255 cases. Adverse outcomes were significantly more common in surgical cases (18.5%) compared to endovascular cases (10.6%) (p = 0.002), and the difference was not altered after adjusting for age, sex, race, transfer admissions, emergency room admissions, and year of treatment (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4 to 3.3; p = 0.001). In-hospital mortality was also increased in surgical cases (2.3% versus 0.4%; p = 0.039), but the difference was not significant in the multivariable model (OR 6.3, 95% CI 0.9 to 46.1; p = 0.07). Length of stay and hospital charges were significantly greater for surgical cases (p < 0.0001 for each), and these differences were not affected by risk adjustment. CONCLUSION: Endovascular coil embolization resulted in fewer adverse outcomes than surgery for unruptured cerebral aneurysms treated at the university hospitals studied. Although these results should be seen as preliminary, the magnitude of difference and current predominance of surgery appear to justify a randomized trial.
OBJECTIVE: To compare complications of surgical clipping and coil embolization in the treatment of unruptured aneurysms. BACKGROUND: Surgical clipping has been the preferred treatment for unruptured cerebral aneurysms but endovascular coil embolization is an increasingly employed alternative. No direct comparisons of the techniques are available to guide clinical decision making. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of patients treated for unruptured cerebral aneurysms at 60 university hospitals from January 1994 through June 1997 using the University HealthSystem Consortium database. The database was validated by chart review from one of the participant universities. The main outcome measures were in-hospital mortality and adverse outcomes, defined as in-hospital deaths and discharges to nursing homes or rehabilitation hospitals. RESULTS: The primary treatment modality was surgical in 2,357 cases and endovascular in 255 cases. Adverse outcomes were significantly more common in surgical cases (18.5%) compared to endovascular cases (10.6%) (p = 0.002), and the difference was not altered after adjusting for age, sex, race, transfer admissions, emergency room admissions, and year of treatment (odds ratio [OR] 2.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4 to 3.3; p = 0.001). In-hospital mortality was also increased in surgical cases (2.3% versus 0.4%; p = 0.039), but the difference was not significant in the multivariable model (OR 6.3, 95% CI 0.9 to 46.1; p = 0.07). Length of stay and hospital charges were significantly greater for surgical cases (p < 0.0001 for each), and these differences were not affected by risk adjustment. CONCLUSION: Endovascular coil embolization resulted in fewer adverse outcomes than surgery for unruptured cerebral aneurysms treated at the university hospitals studied. Although these results should be seen as preliminary, the magnitude of difference and current predominance of surgery appear to justify a randomized trial.
Authors: Jawad F Kirmani; Nazli Janjua; Ammar Al Kawi; Shafiuddin Ahmed; Ismail Khatri; Ali Ebrahimi; Afshin A Divani; Adnan I Qureshi Journal: NeuroRx Date: 2005-04
Authors: Ganesh Asaithambi; Malik M Adil; Kavisha M Shah; Lori C Jordan; Adnan I Qureshi Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: G Rordorf; R J Bellon; R E Budzik; J Farkas; G F Reinking; R S Pergolizzi; M Ezzeddine; A M Norbash; R G Gonzalez; C M Putman Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 3.825