Volovici V, Verploegh IS, van Doormaal PJ, van Es ACGM, Roozenbeek B, Lingsma HF, Lanzino G, Dammers R, Krisht AF. Growth of unruptured aneurysms: A meta-analysis of natural history and endovascular studies.
J Clin Neurosci 2021;
91:343-349. [PMID:
34373050 DOI:
10.1016/j.jocn.2021.07.034]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2021] [Revised: 07/09/2021] [Accepted: 07/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
The growth of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) is a strong predictor of rupture. Clinical observations suggest that some UIAs might grow faster after endovascular treatment than untreated UIAs. There are no head-to-head comparisons of incidence rates of UIAs thus far.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar for relevant articles from the inception of the databases to March 2020. We pooled and compared the incidence rates for the growth of aneurysms from natural history studies and endovascular treatment studies. Generalized linear models were used for confounder adjustment for the prespecified confounders age, size and location.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies (10 describing growth in natural history and 15 reporting growth after endovascular therapy) considering 6325 aneurysms were included in the meta-analysis. The median size of aneurysms was 3.7 mm in the natural history studies and 6.4 mm in endovascular treatment studies (p = 0.001). The pooled incidence rate (IR) of growth was significantly higher in endovascular treatment studies (IR 52 per 1000 person-years, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) 36-79) compared to natural history studies (IR 28 per 1000 person-years, 95% CI 17 - 46, p-value < 0.01) after adjustment for confounders.
CONCLUSION
Our results suggest that the incidence rate of cerebral aneurysm growth might be higher after endovascular therapy than the incidence rates reported in natural history studies. These results should be viewed in light of the risk of bias of the individual studies and the risk of ecological bias.
Collapse