Comparative study of interventional and conservative treatment of intracranial vertebrobasilar artery trunk large aneurysms / 中华放射学杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective:To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endovascular interventional treatment of the intracranial vertebrobasilar trunk large aneurysms (VBTLAs) compared with conservative treatment.Methods:This is a prospective multi-center cohort study. From October 2012 to October 2018, a total of 69 patients with intracranial vertebrobasilar trunk large aneurysm (diameter>10 mm) from Henan Province People's Hospital and People's Liberation Army Rocket Medical Center were included in this study. Patients themselves chose either endovascular interventional therapy (interventional group) or conservative treatment (conservative group) after discussion with their doctors. The χ 2 test was used to compare the incidence of deaths, stroke, and all other serious adverse events including other site bleeding, myocardial infarction and others between the two groups. Results:A total of 69 patients were enrolled, of whom 51 patients were enrolled in interventional group, 18 patients underwent endovascular reconstructive therapy, 11 patients underwent deconstructive therapy, and 4 patients underwent conjunction interventional treatments. Eighteen patients were enrolled in conservative group, of whom 11 cases received simple risk factor control, 7 cases received antiplatelet and risk factors control. The proportions of hypertensive patients 94.4% (17/18) and giant aneurysms 50.0% (9/18) in the conservative group were higher than those in the surgery group 64.7% (33/51, χ 2=4.500, P=0.034), 19.6% (10/51, χ 2=4.730, P= 0.030).The incidence of all serious adverse events associated with protocol was 15.7% (8/51) in the interventional group and 44.4% (8/18) in the conservative group [risk ratio (RR) =0.353, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.156-0.801], and the difference was significant (χ 2=4.668, P=0.031). The incidence of fatal events associated with protocol was 2.0% (1/51) in the interventional group and 38.9% (7/18) in the conservative group (RR=0.050, 95%CI: 0.007-0.382), and the difference was significant (χ 2=14.281, P<0.001). The incidence of hemorrhage events associated with protocol was 2.0% (1/51) in the interventional group and 22.2% (4/18) in the conservative group (RR=0.088, 95%CI: 0.011-0.738), and the difference was significant (χ 2 =5.391, P=0.020). Follow-up imaging showed that the occlusion rate of aneurysms in 44 patients in the interventional group was 56.8% (25/44) after a median follow-up of 6 months. Imaging follow-up was obtained in 9 patients, whose occlusion rate of aneurysms was 0 and the median follow-up time was 12 months, in the conservative group. The difference was significant(χ 2 =7.534, P=0.006). Conclusion:Compared with conservative treatment, endovascular intervention of the intracranial VBTLAs has lower incidences of serious adverse events and death events.