A systematic review of non-trunk basilar perforator aneurysms: is it worth chasing the small fish?

Author:

Granja Manuel F,Monteiro Andre,Agnoletto Guilherme Jose,Jamal Sara,Sauvageau Eric,Aghaebrahim AminORCID,Hanel RicardoORCID

Abstract

Background and purposeNon-trunk basilar artery perforator aneurysms (BAPAs) are rare intracranial vascular pathologies that have long been underdiagnosed, under-reported, and under-analyzed. We performed a systematic review of the efficacy and safety endpoints between conservative and active treatment approaches for non-trunk BAPAs.MethodsMajor databases were analyzed for relevant publications between 1995 and 2019. Studies comparing the outcomes between conservative and active treatment approaches such as coiling, stenting, clipping, liquid embolization, and flow diversion were included. Mortality rate, rate of permanent neurological deficit as determined by the modified Rankin Score (mRS), rate of second treatment occurrence, and perioperative complication rate were also assessed.ResultsA total of 24 studies, including 54 patients with 56 non-trunk BAPAs, were included. The mean maximum aneurysm diameter was 2.70 mm (range 1–10). A diagnosis was achieved with the initial DSA in 50.0% (27/54) of the patients. A conservative approach was used in 16 patients while active treatment was used in the other 38. Thirteen of 15 (86.7%) patients in the conservative group and 27/34 (79.4%) in the active treatment group had an mRS score 0–2. A non-significant higher odds of a positive outcome was observed in the conservative group (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.54). The event-related mortality rate was 3.55% (3/54) with one procedure-related death in the active treatment group.ConclusionsIn patients with non-trunk BAPAs unamenable to active treatment, conservative approaches may result in acceptable functional outcomes and low morbidity. Small sample sizes and under-reporting of outcomes warrant further study.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Neurology (clinical),General Medicine,Surgery

Cited by 14 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

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