Vanninen R, Koivisto T, Saari T, Hernesniemi J, Vapalahti M
Department of Clinical Radiology, Kuopio University Hospital, Finland.
Radiology. 1999 May;211(2):325-36. doi: 10.1148/radiology.211.2.r99ap06325.
To compare the use of electrolytically detachable coils versus surgical ligation for the management of acutely ruptured intracranial aneurysm.
A prospective randomized study included 109 patients with acute (< 72 hours) subarachnoid hemorrhage caused by a ruptured aneurysm (Hunt and Hess grade I-II [n = 67], grade III [n = 26], or grade IV-V [n = 16]). All patients were suitable candidates for both endovascular and surgical treatment and were randomly assigned to undergo coil embolization (n = 52) or surgical ligation (n = 57).
Significantly better primary angiographic results were achieved after surgery in patients with anterior cerebral artery aneurysm (n = 55, P = .005) and after endovascular treatment in those with posterior circulation aneurysm (n = 11, P = .045). No significant differences were seen in middle cerebral artery (n = 19) or internal carotid artery (n = 24) aneurysms. Early rebleeding occurred in one patient after incomplete coil embolization. The technique-related mortality rate was 4% in the surgical group and 2% in the endovascular group. Clinical outcome (Glasgow Outcome Scale score) at 3 months was not significantly different between treatment groups in terms of intended treatment modality. No late rebleedings had occurred at the time of this writing.
In selected patients with a recently ruptured intracranial aneurysm, favorable results were achieved by using endovascular treatment. Subsequent acute or late open surgery was sometimes required. The clinical outcome at 3 months was comparable in the endovascular and surgical treatment groups.
比较电解可脱卸弹簧圈与外科结扎术在治疗急性破裂颅内动脉瘤中的应用。
一项前瞻性随机研究纳入了109例因动脉瘤破裂导致急性(<72小时)蛛网膜下腔出血的患者(Hunt和Hess分级I-II级[n = 67]、III级[n = 26]或IV-V级[n = 16])。所有患者均适合血管内治疗和外科治疗,被随机分配接受弹簧圈栓塞术(n = 52)或外科结扎术(n = 57)。
大脑前动脉动脉瘤患者(n = 55,P = .005)手术后的初次血管造影结果明显更好,而后循环动脉瘤患者(n = 11,P = .045)血管内治疗后的结果更好。大脑中动脉(n = 19)或颈内动脉(n = 24)动脉瘤患者中未观察到显著差异。1例患者在弹簧圈栓塞不完全后发生早期再出血。外科组的技术相关死亡率为4%,血管内组为2%。就预期治疗方式而言,治疗组在3个月时的临床结局(格拉斯哥结局量表评分)无显著差异。在撰写本文时未发生晚期再出血。
在部分近期破裂的颅内动脉瘤患者中,血管内治疗取得了良好效果。有时需要后续进行急性或晚期开放手术。血管内治疗组和外科治疗组在3个月时的临床结局相当。