Retrospective Application of Risk Scores to Unruptured Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysms

Author:

Wójtowicz Katarzyna1,Przepiorka Lukasz1ORCID,Kujawski Sławomir2ORCID,Maj Edyta3,Marchel Andrzej1,Kunert Przemysław1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland

2. Department of Exercise Physiology and Functional Anatomy, Ludwik Rydygier Collegium Medicum in Bydgoszcz, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, 85-077 Bydgoszcz, Poland

3. Second Department of Clinical Radiology, Medical University of Warsaw, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland

Abstract

Background: Treatment decisions for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) pose a challenge for neurosurgeons, prompting the development of clinical scales assessing hemorrhage risk to provide management guidance. This study compares recommendations from the PHASES and UIA treatment scores (UIATS) applied to anterior communicating artery (AComA) UIAs against real-world management. Methods: While UIATS recommends management, for PHASES, an aneurysm with score of 10 or more was considered “high-risk”. Analysis involved assessing the concordance in each group alongside comparison to real-word management. Results: Among 129 patients, 46.5% were observed and 53.5% were treated. PHASES scores were significantly higher in the treatment group (p = 0.00002), and UIATS recommendations correlated with real-world decisions (p < 0.001). We observed no difference in the frequencies of UIATS recommendations between high- and low-risk groups. When comparing the UIATS and PHASES, 33% of high-risk aneurysms received a UIATS conservative management recommendation. In 39% of high-risk aneurysms, the UIATS recommendation was not definitive. Conversely, 27% of low-risk aneurysms obtained a UIATS UIA repair recommendation. Overall, concordance between PHASES and UIATS was 32%. Conclusions: Significant discordance in therapeutic suggestions underscores the predominant influence of center experience and individual assessments. Future studies should refine and validate decision-making strategies, potentially exploring alternative applications or developing tailored scales.

Publisher

MDPI AG

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3