| Literature DB >> 35911913 |
Weili Hao1, Hong Hao1, Chun-Feng Ren2, Xiangling Wang3, Bulang Gao1.
Abstract
Objectives: To explore the associations between posterior communicating artery (PComA) aneurysms and morphological characteristics of arteries upstream of and around the PComA bifurcation site.Entities:
Keywords: angle; internal carotid artery; morphological parameters; posterior communicating artery aneurysm; tortuosity
Year: 2022 PMID: 35911913 PMCID: PMC9326252 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.874466
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.086
Figure 1The measurement of morphological parameters. (A) A posterior communicating artery (PComA) aneurysm is shown (arrow). (B) D1 is the diameter of the incircle fitting the carotid siphon bend. (C) L is the length of the ICA segment from OphA bifurcation (Point O) to PComA bifurcation (Point P), and TL referred to its tortuosity. (D) D2 refers to the diameter of the osculating circle fitting L. (E) θ is defined as the bifurcation angle between the internal carotid artery (ICA) and PComA, formed by Points I1, P, and P1. TICA is defined as the average tortuosity of segments SI2 and SI3 along ICA, and the TPComA is the average tortuosity of three segments SP2 and SP3 along the blood flow. θICA refers to the average flow direction changes of PI2 and PI3, and θPComA refers to the average flow direction changes of PP2 and PP3.
Definition of the morphological parameters.
|
|
|
|---|---|
| D1 (mm) | Diameter of the incircle fitting the carotid siphon bend |
| L (mm) | Length of the ICA segment from ophthalmic artery bifurcation to posterior communicating artery bifurcation |
| TL | Tortuosity of L |
| D2 (mm) | Diameter of the osculating circle fitting L |
| ϕ (°) | Intersection angle of the aforementioned two fitting circle planes |
| θ(°) | Bifurcation angle, formed by Points I1, P and P1 |
| TICA | Average tortuosity of segments SI2 and SI3 along ICA |
| TPComA | Average tortuosity of segments SP2 and SP3 along the blood flow |
| θICA (°) | Average changes of flow direction from P to I2 and I3 |
| θPComA (°) | Average changes of flow direction from P to P2 and P3 |
Univariate analysis of data between the control and posterior communicating artery (PComA) aneurysm groups.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male ( | 28 (45.2%) | 16 (28.1%) | 3.723 | 0.054a |
| Age (years) | 59.82 ± 9.17 | 62.77 ± 8.49 | −1.816 | 0.072b |
| Hypertension | 31 (50.0%) | 41 (71.9%) | 5.977 | 0.014a |
| Smoking | 11(17.7%) | 5(8.8%) | 2.053 | 0.152a |
| Drinking | 8(12.9%) | 5(8.8%) | 0.521 | 0.470a |
| Diabetes | 12(19.4%) | 2(3.5%) | 7.184 | 0.007a |
| Heart disease | 7(11.3%) | 6(10.5%) | 0.018 | 0.894a |
| Hyperlipemia | 5(8.1%) | 4(7%) | 0.047 | 0.829a |
| Rupture | - | 42(73.7%) | - | - |
| Siphon type ( | 2.543 | 0.467a | ||
| C | 18 (29.0%) | 20 (35.5%) | ||
| S | 14 (22.6%) | 15 (26.3%) | ||
| U | 17 (27.4%) | 16 (28.1%) | ||
| V | 13 (21.0%) | 6 (10.5%) | ||
| D1 (mm) | 7.99 ± 1.56 | 8.81 ± 2.00 | −2.118 | 0.036b |
| L (mm) | 9.42 ± 2.32 | 10.12 ± 2.35 | −1.593 | 0.114b |
| TL | 0.08 ± 0.04 | 0.12 ± 0.05 | −4.444 | <0.001b |
| D2 (mm) | 13.30 (11.13, 17.81) | 11.75 (10.12, 13.78) | −2.886 | 0.004c |
| ϕ (°) | 67.63 ± 25.86 | 54.51 ± 21.51 | 2.697 | 0.008b |
| θ (°) | 97.42 ± 13.09 | 105.59 (98.62, 118.13) | 3.271 | 0.001c |
| TICA | 0.03 (0.02, 0.04) | 0.06 (0.04, 0.13) | 5.546 | <0.001c |
| TPComA | 0.30 ± 0.09 | 0.37 (0.28, 0.41) | 2.524 | 0.012c |
| θICA (°) | 21.04 (16.52, 25.38) | 45.86 ± 23.76 | 5.963 | <0.001c |
| θPComA (°) | 96.95 ± 17.93 | 114.76 ± 21.76 | −4.989 | <0.001b |
Data were presented as “mean ± standard deviation (SD)”, median (interquartile range, IQR) or numbers and percentages of patients. (a) χ.
Figure 2Patients with the different degrees of tortuosity (TICA) of the PComA segment of the ICA. (A) A patient with no PComA aneurysms had the TICA tortuosity of 0 at the PComA segment of ICA. (B) A patient with a PComA aneurysm had the TICA of 0.05.
The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of morphological parameters for the diagnosing presence of PComA aneurysms.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| ||||
| D1 | 0.622 | 0.058 | 0.041 | 0.509 | 0.735 |
| TL | 0.725 | 0.051 | <0.001 | 0.625 | 0.826 |
| D2 | 0.357 | 0.057 | 0.016 | 0.246 | 0.468 |
| ϕ | 0.360 | 0.056 | 0.019 | 0.249 | 0.470 |
| θ | 0.705 | 0.054 | 0.001 | 0.599 | 0.812 |
| TICA | 0.843 | 0.041 | <0.001 | 0.762 | 0.923 |
| TPComA | 0.650 | 0.059 | 0.012 | 0.536 | 0.765 |
| θICA | 0.827 | 0.044 | <0.001 | 0.740 | 0.914 |
| θPComA | 0.747 | 0.051 | <0.001 | 0.647 | 0.848 |
AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval.
Pearson's correlation between tortuosity and angles.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| TICA | – | |
| TPComA | – |
Binary logistic regression analysis of morphological parameters associated with PComA aneurysm presence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||||
| Hypertension | 0.702 | 0.638 | 0.272 | 2.017 | 0.577 | 7.050 |
| Diabetes | −1.212 | 1.636 | 0.201 | 0.236 | 0.046 | 1.906 |
| D1 | 0.210 | 0.188 | 0.265 | 1.233 | 0.853 | 1.782 |
| TL | 10.813 | 7.855 | 0.169 | 49656.149 | 0.010 | 2.411E+11 |
| D2 | −0.041 | 0.061 | 0.509 | 0.960 | 0.851 | 1.083 |
| ϕ | −0.003 | 0.013 | 0.816 | 0.997 | 0.972 | 1.023 |
| θ | 0.003 | 0.025 | 0.913 | 1.003 | 0.955 | 1.053 |
| TICA | 2.477 | 0.667 | <0.001 | 11.909 | 3.224 | 43.993 |
| TPComA | 2.168 | 3.922 | 0.580 | 8.738 | 0.004 | 19053.468 |
| constant | −4.347 | 3.128 | 0.165 | 0.013 | ||
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.