Share this Article
Koh KM, Ng Z, Low SY, Chua HZ, Chou N, Low SW, Yeo TT
Correspondence: Dr Sharon Low Yin Yee, sharon.yy.low@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Introduction The results of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) in 2002 have significantly influenced the management of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. There is now an established shift worldwide toward endovascular coiling as the initial treatment of choice. We assessed the outcomes of patients admitted to our institution for aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), comparing the outcomes of patients (World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies [WFNS] grades 1–3) who underwent surgical clipping versus those who underwent endovascular coiling.
Methods We retrospectively reviewed patients admitted to the National University Hospital for SAH secondary to ruptured intracranial aneurysm in 2005–2009. Patients were divided into two groups – clipping and coiling. Data on individual demographics, comorbidities, Fisher grading and Glasgow Outcome Scale scores were collected for the two groups and subjected to relevant statistical analyses.
Results Of the 133 patients admitted for nontraumatic SAH, 89 had ruptured aneurysms. Among the 56 patients classified as WFNS grades 1–3, 23 underwent coiling while the remaining 33 underwent clipping. A significant association was found between Fisher grade and the likelihood of developing hydrocephalus in these patients.
Conclusion Although we acknowledge the presence of management bias in our institution, our findings were similar to those of the ISAT trial. Upon correlation between our results and current evidence-based findings, our findings show that clipping provides similar long-term outcomes as endovascular coiling. In the event that an aneurysm is deemed unsuitable for coiling, clipping remains an effective option.
Keywords: endovascular coiling, intracranial aneurysm, subarachnoid haemorrhage, surgical clipping
Singapore Med J 2013; 54(6): 332-338; http://dx.doi.org/10.11622/smedj.2013127
REFERENCES
| 1. Dupont SA, Wijdicks EF, Lanzino G, Rabinstein AA. Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: an overview for the practicing neurologist. Semin Neurol 2010; 30:545-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1268862 |
||||
| 2. Penn DL, Komortar RJ, Sander Connolly E. Hemodynamic mechanisms underlying cerebral aneurysm pathogenesis. J Clin Neurosci 2011; 18:1435-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2011.05.001 |
||||
| 3. Molyneux A, Kerr R, Stratton I, et al. International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002; 360:1267-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11314-6 |
||||
| 4. McDougall CG, Spetzler RF, Zabramski JM, et al. The Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial. J Neurosurg 2012; 116:135-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.3171/2011.8.JNS101767 |
||||
| 5. Molyneux AJ, Kerr RS, Birks J, et al. Risk of recurrent subarachnoid haemorrhage, death, or dependence and standardised mortality ratios after clipping or coiling of an intracranial aneurysm in the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT): long-term follow-up. Lancet Neurol 2009; 8:427-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70080-8 |
||||
| 6. Mayberg MR, Batjer HH, Dacey R, et al. Guidelines for the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. A statement for healthcare professionals from a special writing group of the Stroke Council, American Heart Association. Stroke 1994; 25:2315-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.25.11.2315 |
||||
| 7. Wardlaw JM, White PM. The detection and management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Brain 2000; 123:205-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/123.2.205 |
||||
| 8. Hop JW, Rinkel GJ, Algra A, van Gijn J. Case-fatality rates and functional outcome after subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review. Stroke 1997; 28:660-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.28.3.660 |
||||
| 9. Hoh BL, Kleinhenz DT, Chi YY, Mocco J, Barker FG 2nd. Incidence of ventricular shunt placement for hydrocephalus with clipping versus coiling for ruptured and unruptured cerebral aneurysms in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database: 2002 to 2007. World Neurosurg 2011; 76:548-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2011.05.054 |
||||
| 10. Linn FH, Rinkel GJ, Algra A, van Gijn J. Incidence of subarachnoid hemorrhage: role of region, year, and rate of computed tomography: a meta-analysis. Stroke 1996; 27:625-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.27.4.625 |
||||
| 11. van Dijk JM, Groen RJ, Ter Laan M, Jeltema JR, Mooij JJ, Metzemaekers JD. Surgical clipping as the preferred treatment for aneurysms of the middle cerebral artery. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2011; 153:2111-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00701-011-1139-6 |
||||
| 12. Tidswell P, Dias PS, Sagar HJ, Mayes AR, Battersby RD. Cognitive outcome after aneurysm rupture: relationship to aneurysm site and perioperative complications. Neurology 1995; 45:875-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.45.5.876 |
||||
| 13. Nam KH, Hamm IS, Kang DH, Park J, Kim YS. Risk of shunt dependent hydrocephalus after treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: surgical clipping versus endovascular coiling according to fisher grading system. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2010; 48:313-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2010.48.4.313 |
||||
| 14. de Oliveira JG, Beck J, Setzer M, et al. Risk of shunt-dependent hydrocephalus after occlusion of ruptured intracranial aneurysms by surgical clipping or endovascular coiling: a single-institution series andmeta-analysis. Neurosurgery 2007; 61:924-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000303188.72425.24 |
||||
| 15. Taha MM, Nakahara I, Higashi T, et al. Endovascular embolization vs surgical clipping in treatment of cerebral aneurysms: morbidity and mortality with short-term outcome. Surg Neurol 2006; 66:277-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surneu.2005.12.031 |
||||
| 16. Fisher CM, Kistler JP, Davis JM. Relation of cerebral vasospasm to subarachnoid hemorrhage visualized by computerized tomographic scanning. Neurosurgery 1980; 6:1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/00006123-198001000-00001 |
||||
| 17. Dorai Z, Hynan LS, Kopitnik TA, Samson D. Factors related to hydrocephalus after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery 2003; 52:763-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/01.NEU.0000053222.74852.2D |
||||
| 18. Ellington E, Margolis G. Block of arachnoid villus by subarachnoid hemorrhage. J Neurosurg 1969; 30:651-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.3171/jns.1969.30.6.0651 |
||||
| 19. Brydon H, Bayston R, Hayward R, Harkness W. The effect of protein and blood cells on the flow-pressure characteristics of shunts. Neurosurgery 1996; 38:498-505. | ||||
| 20. Al-Tamimi YZ, Ahmad M, May SE, et al. A comparison of the outcome of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage before and after the introduction of an endovascular service. J Clin Neurosci 2010; 17:1391-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2010.03.024 |
||||
| 21. Naidech AM, Janjua N, Kreiter KT, et al. Predictors and impact of aneurysm rebleeding after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Arch Neurol 2005; 62:410-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archneur.62.3.410 |
||||
| 22. Qureshi AI, Janardhan V, Hanel RA, Lanzino G. Comparison of endovascular and surgical treatments for intracranial aneurysms: an evidence-based review. Lancet Neurol 2007; 6:816-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(07)70217-X |
||||