BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Practice patterns vary widely among centers with regard to the treatment of unruptured aneurysms. The purpose of the current study was to correlate outcome data with practice patterns, specifically the proportion of unruptured aneurysms treated with neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the NIS, we evaluated outcomes of patients treated for unruptured aneurysms in the United States from 2001 to 2007. Hospitalizations for clipping or coiling of unruptured cerebral aneurysms were identified by cross-matching ICD codes for diagnosis of unruptured aneurysm with procedure codes for clipping or coiling of cerebral aneurysms. Mortality and morbidity, measured as "discharge to long-term facility," were evaluated in relation to the fraction of cases treated with coils versus clipping as well as the annual number of unruptured aneurysms treated by individual hospitals and individual physicians. RESULTS: Markedly lower morbidity (P < .0001) and mortality (P = .0015) were noted in centers that coiled a higher percentage of aneurysms compared with the proportion of aneurysms clipped. Multivariate analysis showed that greater annual numbers of aneurysms treated by individual practitioners were significantly related to decreased morbidity (OR = 0.98, P < .0001), while the association between morbidity and the annual number of aneurysms treated by hospitals was not significant (OR = 1.00, P = .89). CONCLUSIONS: Centers that treated a higher percentage of unruptured aneurysms with coiling compared with clipping achieved markedly lower rates of morbidity and mortality. Our results also confirm that treatment by high-volume practitioners is associated with decreased morbidity.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Practice patterns vary widely among centers with regard to the treatment of unruptured aneurysms. The purpose of the current study was to correlate outcome data with practice patterns, specifically the proportion of unruptured aneurysms treated with neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the NIS, we evaluated outcomes of patients treated for unruptured aneurysms in the United States from 2001 to 2007. Hospitalizations for clipping or coiling of unruptured cerebral aneurysms were identified by cross-matching ICD codes for diagnosis of unruptured aneurysm with procedure codes for clipping or coiling of cerebral aneurysms. Mortality and morbidity, measured as "discharge to long-term facility," were evaluated in relation to the fraction of cases treated with coils versus clipping as well as the annual number of unruptured aneurysms treated by individual hospitals and individual physicians. RESULTS: Markedly lower morbidity (P < .0001) and mortality (P = .0015) were noted in centers that coiled a higher percentage of aneurysms compared with the proportion of aneurysms clipped. Multivariate analysis showed that greater annual numbers of aneurysms treated by individual practitioners were significantly related to decreased morbidity (OR = 0.98, P < .0001), while the association between morbidity and the annual number of aneurysms treated by hospitals was not significant (OR = 1.00, P = .89). CONCLUSIONS: Centers that treated a higher percentage of unruptured aneurysms with coiling compared with clipping achieved markedly lower rates of morbidity and mortality. Our results also confirm that treatment by high-volume practitioners is associated with decreased morbidity.
Authors: Fred G Barker; Sepideh Amin-Hanjani; William E Butler; Christopher S Ogilvy; Bob S Carter Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: DeWitte T Cross; David L Tirschwell; Mary Ann Clark; Dan Tuden; Colin P Derdeyn; Christopher J Moran; Ralph G Dacey Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: Mitchell F Berman; Robert A Solomon; Stephan A Mayer; S Claiborne Johnston; Pixie P Yung Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-08-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jens Fiehler; Christophe Cognard; Mauro Gallitelli; Olav Jansen; Adam Kobayashi; Heinrich P Mattle; Keith W Muir; Mikael Mazighi; Karl Schaller; Peter D Schellinger Journal: Eur Stroke J Date: 2016-07-26
Authors: Daniel M Heiferman; Aravind Somasundaram; Alexis J Alvarado; Adam M Zanation; Amy L Pittman; Anand V Germanwala Journal: Clin Neurol Neurosurg Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: Jens Fiehler; Michael Söderman; Francis Turjman; Philip M White; Søren Jacob Bakke; Salvatore Mangiafico; Rüdiger von Kummer; Mario Muto; Christophe Cognard; Jan Gralla Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Jennifer N Rodriguez; Fred J Clubb; Thomas S Wilson; Matthew W Miller; Theresa W Fossum; Jonathan Hartman; Egemen Tuzun; Pooja Singhal; Duncan J Maitland Journal: J Biomed Mater Res A Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 4.396
Authors: W Brinjikji; Y-Q Zhu; G Lanzino; H J Cloft; M H Murad; Z Wang; D F Kallmes Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 3.825