Endovascular treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage in Japanese Registry of Neuroendovascular Therapy (JR-NET) 1 and 2

Abstract

To distinguish the characteristics of ruptured cerebral aneurysm that are suitable for endovascular treatment from those that are not, we evaluated factors that influenced the results of aneurysm embolization in patients with ruptured cerebral aneurysm, based on data from the Japanese Registry of Neuroendovascular Therapy (JR-NET) 1 and 2. The multivariate analysis revealed that young patients, patients with low modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores before onset, and patients with low World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) grades had good outcome. Compared to proximal internal carotid artery (ICA) aneurysms, the odds ratio of middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysms was 1.67, indicating poorer outcome for MCA aneurysms, and patients with small, wide-neck cerebral aneurysms had poor outcome. Patients treated after 15 days had better outcome than during other periods. The timing of treatment, however, did not influence the outcome in patients treated within 14 days. The outcome was poorer when the responsible doctor for the treatment was a specialist or a non-specialist than a supervisory doctor. The outcome of patients treated with bare platinum coils, and three dimensional (3D) rotational angiography was better, and the outcome of patients who completed treatment with body filling was poorer than in patients with complete occlusion. Perioperative hemorrhagic complications, all ischemic complications, and rebleeding occurred in 4.5%, 6.4%, and 1.4% of patients, respectively. All these complications had poor outcome factors on day 30, with odds ratios of 2.72, 2.96, and 25.49, respectively. We must be fully aware of these risk factors and determine indications for the treatment when endovascular treatment is performed as the treatment of choice for ruptured cerebral aneurysm.