RESUMO
Cerebral perforators are end-arteries that vascularize specific deep territories in the cerebral hemispheres and brainstem. Due to improved imaging quality, these aneurysms are increasingly diagnosed in clinical routine. High resolution 3D angiographic images are mandatory and in some occasions fusion images might be helpful to detect these aneurysms. Basilar artery perforator aneurysms (or BAPAs) are one of the most common subtypes of perforator aneurysms and might cause subarachnoid hemorrhage along the brainstem (perimesencephalic hemorrhage). Due to the limited evidence, the management of BAPAs may pose a challenge in clinical routine. While some aneurysms can be managed conservatively, a few might require treatment to prevent rebleeding. We present the cases of two patients with BAPAs managed at our center in order to increase the awareness on these potentially underdiagnosed aneurysms.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acute basilar artery occlusion (BAO) is a severe disease that is associated with an 85% mortality rate if untreated. Several studies have analyzed the use of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in the different scenarios of BAO. However, the results remain conflicting and the role of MT as standard of care for vertebrobasilar tandem occlusions (VBTO) has not been confirmed. Our goal was to assess technical feasibility, safety, and functional outcome of endovascular treatment of VBTO in comparison to isolated BAO (IBAO). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all prospectively collected patients with acute BAO from six tertiary centers between September 2016 and November 2021. Patients were subsequently divided into two groups: VBTO and IBAO. Baseline data, procedural details, and outcomes were compared between groups. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were included, 55 presenting with a VBTO and 135 with IBAO. Successful recanalization was equally common in both groups (89.1% and 86.0%). Rates of favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale: 0-2) were higher in patients with VBTO compared to IBAO (36.4% vs. 25.2%, p = 0.048) and mortality was lower (29.1% vs. 33.3%). However, these associations faded after adjustment for confounders (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.86, 95% CI 0.35-2.05; aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.35-2.45). Rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage did not differ between the groups (VBTO: 7.3% vs. IBAO: 4.2%; p = 0.496). CONCLUSION: Endovascular treatment of VBTO is technically feasible and safe with similar rates of successful recanalization, favorable functional outcome, and mortality to those in patients with IBAO.