| Literature DB >> 33087795 |
Jian Zhang1,2, Anil Can1,3, Pui Man Rosalind Lai1, Srinivasan Mukundan4, Victor M Castro5, Dmitriy Dligach6,7, Sean Finan6, Vivian S Gainer5, Nancy A Shadick8, Guergana Savova6, Shawn N Murphy5,9, Tianxi Cai10, Scott T Weiss8,11, Rose Du12,13.
Abstract
Hemodynamic stress is thought to play an important role in the formation of intracranial aneurysms, which is conditioned by the geometry of the surrounding vasculature. Our goal was to identify image-based morphological parameters that were associated with basilar artery tip aneurysms (BTA) in a location-specific manner. Three-dimensional morphological parameters obtained from CT-angiography (CTA) or digital subtraction angiography (DSA) from 207 patients with BTAs and a control group of 106 patients with aneurysms elsewhere to control for non-morphological factors, who were diagnosed at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital between 1990 and 2016, were evaluated. We examined the presence of hypoplastic, aplastic or fetal PCoAs, vertebral dominance, and diameters and angles of surrounding parent and daughter vessels. Univariable and multivariable statistical analyses were performed to determine statistical significance. Sensitivity analyses with small (≤ 3 mm) aneurysms only and with angles excluded, were also performed. In multivariable analysis, daughter-daughter angle was directly, and parent artery diameter and diameter size ratio were inversely associated with BTAs. These results remained significant in the subgroup analysis of small aneurysms (width ≤ 3 mm) and when angles were excluded. These easily measurable and robust parameters that are unlikely to be affected by aneurysm formation could aid in risk stratification for the formation of BTAs in high-risk patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33087795 PMCID: PMC7578056 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74266-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Illustration of morphological parameters.
Demographic data and clinical risk factors of patients with and without basilar tip aneurysms (BTAs).
| Variables | All patients | BTA | Non-BTA | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (SD) | 55.8 (12.0) | 57.0 (11.3) | 53.6 (13.2) | 0.02 |
| Female (%) | 242 (77.3) | 157 (75.8) | 85 (80.2) | 0.39 |
| Alcohol use (current) (%) | 150 (47.9) | 96 (46.4) | 54 (50.9) | 0.49 |
| Tobacco use (current) (%) | 122 (0.39) | 81 (39.1) | 41 (38.7) | 0.96 |
| Hypertension (%) | 160 (51.3) | 110 (53.4) | 50 (47.2) | 0.30 |
| Family history of SAH (%) | 34 (10.9) | 23 (11.1) | 11 (10.6) | 0.89 |
| Family history of aneurysms (%) | 65 (20.9) | 40 (19.3) | 25 (24.0) | 0.34 |
| History of ruptured aneurysm (%) | 127 (40.6) | 83 (40.1) | 44 (41.5) | 0.81 |
SAH = subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Characteristics of the surrounding vasculature for basilar tip aneurysms (BTAs) and non-basilar tip aneurysms (non-BTAs) (N = 313).
| Variables | All | BTA | Non-BTA | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hypoplastic PCoA (%) | ||||
| No | 194 (62.0) | 121 (58.5) | 73 (68.9) | 0.07 |
| Unilateral | 63 (20.1) | 46 (22.2) | 17 (16.0) | 0.20 |
| Bilateral | 56 (17.9) | 40 (19.3) | 16 (15.1) | 0.36 |
| Aplastic PCoA (%) | ||||
| No | 301 (96.2) | 195 (94.2) | 106 (100.0) | 0.02 |
| Unilateral | 8 (2.6) | 8 (3.9) | 0 (0.0) | 0.04 |
| Bilateral | 4 (1.3) | 4 (1.9) | 0 (0.0) | 0.15 |
| Fetal PCoA (%) | ||||
| No | 287 (91.7) | 190 (91.8) | 97 (91.5) | 0.93 |
| Unilateral | 20 (6.4) | 12 (5.8) | 8 (7.5) | 0.56 |
| Bilateral | 6 (1.9) | 5 (2.4) | 1 (0.9) | 0.36 |
| Vertebral dominance (%) | 70 (22.4) | 43 (20.8) | 27 (25.5) | 0.35 |
| Daughter diameter ratio (larger/smaller) (SD) | 1.19 (0.26) | 1.18 (0.22) | 1.22 (0.33) | 0.18 |
| Basilar artery diameter in mm (SD) | 2.54 (0.46) | 2.49 (0.46) | 2.64 (0.44) | 0.01 |
| Diameter size ratio (Parent/(D1 + D2)) | 0.74 (0.11) | 0.71 (0.11) | 0.80 (0.10) | < 0.01 |
| Daughter–daughter angle in degrees (SD) | 124.58 (29.03) | 139.5 (21.6) | 95.5 (17.3) | < 0.01 |
| Parent–daughter angle ratio (SD) | 1.27 (0.63) | 1.34 (0.77) | 1.15 (0.13) | 0.01 |
D1 = diameter of daughter vessel 1, D2 = diameter of daughter vessel 2, PCoA = posterior communicating artery.
Univariable and multivariable logistic regression for the presence of a basilar tip aneurysm (N = 313).
| Variables | Univariable | Multivariable | Multivariablea | Multivariableb | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | P-val | OR (95% CI) | P-val | OR (95% CI) | P-val | OR (95% CI) | P-val | |
| Age | 1.02 (1.00–1.05) | 0.02 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Female | 0.78 (0.44–1.38) | 0.39 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Alcohol use (current) | 0.85 (0.53–1.36) | 0.49 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Tobacco use (current) | 1.01 (0.62–1.64) | 0.96 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hypertension | 1.28 (0.80–2.05) | 0.30 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Family history of SAH | 0.76 (0.43–1.33) | 0.34 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Family history of aneurysms | 1.06 (0.49–2.26) | 0.89 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Ruptured aneurysm | 0.94 (0.59–1.52) | 0.81 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hypoplastic PCoA | ||||||||
| Unilateral vs. no | 1.63 (0.87–3.06) | 0.13 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Bilateral vs. no | 1.51 (0.79–2.88) | 0.21 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Aplastic PCoA | ||||||||
| Unilateral vs. no | 9.26 (1.14–1201) | 0.03 | – | – | ||||
| Bilateral vs. no | 4.90 (0.52–652) | 0.19 | – | – | ||||
| Fetal PCoA | ||||||||
| Unilateral vs. no | 0.77 (0.30–1.94) | 0.57 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Bilateral vs. no | 2.55 (0.29–22.2) | 0.40 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Vertebral dominance | 0.77 (0.44–1.33) | 0.35 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Daughter diameter ratio (larger/smaller) | 0.56 (0.23–1.35) | 0.20 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Parent artery (basilar artery) diameter in mm | 0.49 (0.29–0.83) | < 0.01 | 0.18 (0.06–0.46) | < 0.01 | 0.17 (0.03–0.73) | 0.02 | 0.52 (0.29–0.93) | 0.03 |
| Diameter size ratio (Parent/(D1 + D2)) | 4.36 × 10−4 (3.06 × 10−5–0.005) | < 0.01 | 0.001 (2.76 × 10−5–0.05) | < 0.01 | 6.80 × 10−6 (2.65 × 10−10–0.04) | 0.01 | 4.27 × 10−4 (2.87 × 10−5–0.005) | < 0.01 |
| Daughter–daughter angle in degrees | 1.11 (1.08–1.13) | < 0.01 | 1.11 (1.08–1.14) | < 0.01 | 1.10 (1.06–1.15) | < 0.01 | – | – |
| Parent–daughter angle ratio | 24.94 (5.86–106.1) | < 0.01 | – | – | – | – | – | – |
Subgroup analysis with small basilar tip aneurysms only (width ≤ 3 mm).
Sensitivity analysis without angles.
D1 = diameter of daughter vessel 1, D2 = diameter of daughter vessel 2, PCoA = posterior communicating artery, SAH = subarachnoid hemorrhage.
Figure 2Plot of aneurysm width vs. daughter–daughter angle. Pearson’s correlation test for the association between aneurysm width and daughter–daughter angle was not significant (correlation = 0.06, p = 0.36).