4.7 Article

Occurrence and impact of delayed cerebral ischemia after coiling and after clipping in the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT)

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY
卷 259, 期 4, 页码 679-683

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-011-6243-2

关键词

Subarachnoid hemorrhage; Delayed cerebral ischemia; Cerebral aneurysm

资金

  1. Netherlands Heart Foundation [2005016]
  2. MRC [G0700479] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [G0700479] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is an important cause of poor outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). We studied differences in incidence and impact of DCI as defined clinically after coiling and after clipping in the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial. We calculated odds ratios (OR) for DCI for clipping versus coiling with logistic regression analysis. With coiled patients without DCI as the reference group, we calculated ORs for poor outcome at 2 months and 1 year for coiled patients with DCI and for clipped patients without, and with DCI. With these ORs, we calculated relative excess risk due to Interaction (RERI). Clipping increased the risk of DCI compared to coiling in the 2,143 patients OR 1.24, 95% confidence interval (95% CI 1.01-1.51). Coiled patients with DCI, clipped patients without DCI, and clipped patients with DCI all had higher risks of poor outcome than coiled patients without DCI. Clipping and DCI showed no interaction for poor outcome at 2 months: RERI 0.12 (95% CI -1.16 to 1.40) or 1 year: RERI -0.48 (95% CI -1.69 to 0.74). Only for patients treated within 4 days, coiling and DCI was associated with a poorer outcome at 1 year than clipping and DCI (RERI -2.02, 95% CI -3.97 to -0.08). DCI was more common after clipping than after coiling in SAH patients in ISAT. Impact of DCI on poor outcome did not differ between clipped and coiled patients, except for patients treated within 4 days, in whom DCI resulted more often in poor outcome after coiling than after clipping.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据