A single-center comparative study with large sample size on stent-assisted coiling versus coiling alone for the ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms: Analysis of safety, efficacy, and prognosis based on propensity score matching.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 Medicine
Interventional Neuroradiology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-01-08 DOI:10.1177/15910199221150293
Wei Shang, Xiaoting Chang, Yousong Xu, Bin Dong
{"title":"A single-center comparative study with large sample size on stent-assisted coiling versus coiling alone for the ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms: Analysis of safety, efficacy, and prognosis based on propensity score matching.","authors":"Wei Shang, Xiaoting Chang, Yousong Xu, Bin Dong","doi":"10.1177/15910199221150293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the safety, efficacy, and prognosis of stent-assisted coiling (SAC) versus coiling alone (CA) in the treatment of ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms (ACoAAs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The clinical and follow-up data of ruptured ACoAAs treated with endovascular treatment in our center from January 2011 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into an SAC group and a CA group based on whether stents were used, after which the two groups were matched for propensity scores. The general clinical data, embolization effect, perioperative complications, clinical, and follow-up results after matching were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 354 patients were enrolled, of whom 147 patients (41.5%) received SAC and the rest received CA. Comparison baseline of two groups showed that patients with a larger diameter, wide neck, irregular morphology, and anterior direction were more likely to receive SAC. After propensity score matching, 113 patients were included in each group. Immediately postoperative angiography results showed that the complete embolization rate of patients in the SAC group was significantly lower than that in the CA group (62.8% vs. 76.1%, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of perioperative complications, mortality, poor prognosis at discharge or follow-up, mid-term complete occlusion rate and recurrence rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The stent-assisted treatment of ruptured ACoAAs did not increase the risk of perioperative complications or the probability of poor prognosis, indicating that SAC treatment of ruptured ACoAAs is safe and feasible and has a reliable mid-term cure rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":14380,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":"71-79"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11833855/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199221150293","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To compare the safety, efficacy, and prognosis of stent-assisted coiling (SAC) versus coiling alone (CA) in the treatment of ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms (ACoAAs).

Methods: The clinical and follow-up data of ruptured ACoAAs treated with endovascular treatment in our center from January 2011 to January 2021 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into an SAC group and a CA group based on whether stents were used, after which the two groups were matched for propensity scores. The general clinical data, embolization effect, perioperative complications, clinical, and follow-up results after matching were compared.

Results: A total of 354 patients were enrolled, of whom 147 patients (41.5%) received SAC and the rest received CA. Comparison baseline of two groups showed that patients with a larger diameter, wide neck, irregular morphology, and anterior direction were more likely to receive SAC. After propensity score matching, 113 patients were included in each group. Immediately postoperative angiography results showed that the complete embolization rate of patients in the SAC group was significantly lower than that in the CA group (62.8% vs. 76.1%, p = 0.03). There were no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of perioperative complications, mortality, poor prognosis at discharge or follow-up, mid-term complete occlusion rate and recurrence rate.

Conclusion: The stent-assisted treatment of ruptured ACoAAs did not increase the risk of perioperative complications or the probability of poor prognosis, indicating that SAC treatment of ruptured ACoAAs is safe and feasible and has a reliable mid-term cure rate.

单中心大样本量支架辅助卷曲与单纯卷曲治疗破裂前交通动脉瘤的比较研究:基于倾向评分匹配的安全性、有效性和预后分析。
目的比较支架辅助旋切术(SAC)与单纯旋切术(CA)治疗破裂的前交通动脉动脉瘤(ACoAAs)的安全性、有效性和预后:回顾性收集2011年1月至2021年1月在本中心接受血管内治疗的破裂前交通动脉瘤的临床和随访数据。根据是否使用支架将患者分为SAC组和CA组,然后对两组患者进行倾向评分匹配。比较匹配后的一般临床数据、栓塞效果、围手术期并发症、临床和随访结果:共有 354 名患者入选,其中 147 名患者(41.5%)接受了 SAC,其余患者接受了 CA。两组基线比较显示,直径较大、颈部较宽、形态不规则和前向的患者更有可能接受SAC。经过倾向评分匹配后,两组各纳入了 113 名患者。术后即刻血管造影结果显示,SAC 组患者的完全栓塞率明显低于 CA 组(62.8% 对 76.1%,P = 0.03)。两组患者在围手术期并发症发生率、死亡率、出院或随访时预后不良率、中期完全闭塞率和复发率方面无明显差异:结论:支架辅助治疗破裂的 ACoAAs 并未增加围手术期并发症的风险或预后不良的概率,这表明 SAC 治疗破裂的 ACoAAs 是安全可行的,并且具有可靠的中期治愈率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
11.80%
发文量
192
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Interventional Neuroradiology (INR) is a peer-reviewed clinical practice journal documenting the current state of interventional neuroradiology worldwide. INR publishes original clinical observations, descriptions of new techniques or procedures, case reports, and articles on the ethical and social aspects of related health care. Original research published in INR is related to the practice of interventional neuroradiology...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信