4.7 Article

Increased Wall Enhancement During Follow-Up as a Predictor of Subsequent Aneurysmal Growth

期刊

STROKE
卷 51, 期 6, 页码 1868-1872

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.028431

关键词

follow-up; gadolinium; inflammation; intracranial aneurysms; magnetic resonance imaging

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose- Absence of arterial wall enhancement (AWE) of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIA) has shown promise at predicting which aneurysms will not rupture. We here tested the hypothesis that increased enhancement during follow-up (increased intensity, extension, or thickness or appearance of de novo enhancement), assessed using vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging, was associated with higher rates of subsequent growth. Methods- Patients with UIA were included between 2012 and 2018. Two readers independently rated AWE modification on 3T vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging, and morphological changes on time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography during follow-up. Results- A total of 129 patients harboring 145 UIA (mean size 4.1 mm) met study criteria, of which 12 (8.3%) displayed morphological growth at 2 years. Of them, 8 demonstrated increased AWE during follow-up before or concurrently to morphological growth, and 4 had preexisting AWE that remained stable before growth. In the remaining 133 (nongrowing) UIAs, no AWE modifications were found. In multivariable analysis, increased AWE, not size, was associated with UIA growth (relative risk, 26.1 [95% CI, 7.4-91.7], P<0.001). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for UIA growth of increased AWE during follow-up were, respectively, of 67%, 100%, 96%, and 100%. Conclusions- Increased AWE during follow-up of conservatively managed UIAs predicts aneurysm growth over a 2-year period. This may impact UIA management towards closer monitoring or preventive treatment. Replication in a different setting is warranted.

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