Objective: We endeavored to develop an unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment score (UIATS) model that includes and quantifies key factors involved in clinical decision-making in the management of UIAs and to assess agreement for this model among specialists in UIA management and research. Methods: An international multidisciplinary (neurosurgery, neuroradiology, neurology, clinical epidemiology) group of 69 specialists was convened to develop and validate the UIATS model using a Delphi consensus. For internal (39 panel members involved in identification of relevant features) and external validation (30 independent external reviewers), 30 selected UIA cases were used to analyze agreement with UIATS management recommendations based on a 5-point Likert scale (5 indicating strong agreement). Interrater agreement (IRA) was assessed with standardized coefficients of dispersion (v_r*) (v_r* = 0 indicating excellent agreement and v_r* = 1 indicating poor agreement). Results: The UIATS accounts for 29 key factors in UIA management. Agreement with UIATS (mean Likert scores) was 4.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.1–4.3) per reviewer for both reviewer cohorts; agreement per case was 4.3 (95% CI 4.1–4.4) for panel members and 4.5 (95% CI 4.3–4.6) for external reviewers (p = 0.017). Mean Likert scores were 4.2 (95% CI 4.1–4.3) for interventional reviewers (n = 56) and 4.1 (95% CI 3.9–4.4) for noninterventional reviewers (n = 12) (p = 0.290). Overall IRA (v_r*) for both cohorts was 0.026 (95% CI 0.019–0.033). Conclusions: This novel UIA decision guidance study captures an excellent consensus among highly informed individuals on UIA management, irrespective of their underlying specialty. Clinicians can use the UIATS as a comprehensive mechanism for indicating how a large group of specialists might manage an individual patient with a UIA.

Delayed cerebral ischemia is a major predictor of poor outcomes in patients who suffer subarachnoid hemorrhage. Treatment options are limited and often ineffective despite many years of investigation and clinical trials. Modern advances in basic science have produced a much more complex, multifactorial framework in which delayed cerebral ischemia is better understood and novel treatments can be developed. Leveraging this knowledge to improve outcomes, however, depends on a holistic understanding of the disease process. We conducted a review of the literature to analyze the current state of investigation into delayed cerebral ischemia with emphasis on the major themes that have emerged over the past decades. Specifically, we discuss microcirculatory dysfunction, glymphatic impairment, inflammation, and neuroelectric disruption as pathological factors in addition to the canonical focus on cerebral vasospasm. This review intends to give clinicians and researchers a summary of the foundations of delayed cerebral ischemia pathophysiology while also underscoring the interactions and interdependencies between pathological factors. Through this overview, we also highlight the advances in translational studies and potential future therapeutic opportunities.

Objective To develop and validate a set of practical prediction tools that reliably estimate the outcome of subarachnoid haemorrhage from ruptured intracranial aneurysms (SAH). Design Cohort study with logistic regression analysis to combine predictors and treatment modality. Setting Subarachnoid Haemorrhage International Trialists’ (SAHIT) data repository, including randomised clinical trials, prospective observational studies, and hospital registries. Participants Researchers collaborated to pool datasets of prospective observational studies, hospital registries, and randomised clinical trials of SAH from multiple geographical regions to develop and validate clinical prediction models. Main outcome measure Predicted risk of mortality or functional outcome at three months according to score on the Glasgow outcome scale. Results Clinical prediction models were developed with individual patient data from 10 936 patients and validated with data from 3355 patients after development of the model. In the validation cohort, a core model including patient age, premorbid hypertension, and neurological grade on admission to predict risk of functional outcome had good discrimination, with an area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.78 to 0.82). When the core model was extended to a “neuroimaging model,” with inclusion of clot volume, aneurysm size, and location, the AUC improved to 0.81 (0.79 to 0.84). A full model that extended the neuroimaging model by including treatment modality had AUC of 0.81 (0.79 to 0.83). Discrimination was lower for a similar set of models to predict risk of mortality (AUC for full model 0.76, 0.69 to 0.82). All models showed satisfactory calibration in the validation cohort. Conclusion The prediction models reliably estimate the outcome of patients who were managed in various settings for ruptured intracranial aneurysms that caused subarachnoid haemorrhage. The predictor items are readily derived at hospital admission. The web based SAHIT prognostic calculator (http://sahitscore.com) and the related app could be adjunctive tools to support management of patients.

Background and Purpose—: Chronic inflammation is postulated as an important phenomenon in intracranial aneurysm wall pathophysiology. This study was conducted to determine if aspirin use impacts the occurrence of intracranial aneurysm rupture. Methods—: Subjects enrolled in the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA) were selected from the prospective untreated cohort (n=1691) in a nested case–control study. Cases were subjects who subsequently had a proven aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage during a 5-year follow-up period. Four control subjects were matched to each case by site and size of aneurysm (58 cases, 213 control subjects). Frequency of aspirin use was determined at baseline interview. Aspirin frequency groups were analyzed for risk of aneurysmal hemorrhage. Bivariable and multivariable analyses were performed using conditional logistic regression. Results—: A trend of a protective effect for risk of unruptured intracranial aneurysm rupture was observed. Patients who used aspirin 3× weekly to daily had an OR for hemorrhage of 0.40 (95% CI, 0.18–0.87); reference group, no use of aspirin), patients in the “< once a month” group had an OR of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.31–2.05), and patients in the “> once a month to 2×/week” group had an OR of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.27–2.81; P =0.025). In multivariable risk factor analyses, patients who used aspirin 3 times weekly to daily had a significantly lower odds of hemorrhage (adjusted OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.11–0.67; P =0.03) compared with those who never take aspirin. Conclusions—: Frequent aspirin use may confer a protective effect for risk of intracranial aneurysm rupture. Future investigation in animal models and clinical studies is needed.

Background and Purpose—: Flow diversion has emerged as an important tool for the management of intracranial aneurysms. The purpose of this study was to compare flow diversion and traditional embolization strategies in terms of safety, efficacy, and clinical outcomes in patients with unruptured, large saccular aneurysms (≥10 mm). Methods—: Forty patients treated with the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED) were matched in a 1:3 fashion with 120 patients treated with coiling based on patient age and aneurysm size. Fusiform and anterior communicating artery aneurysms were eliminated from the analysis. Procedural complications, angiographic results, and clinical outcomes were analyzed and compared. Results—: There were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of patient age, sex, aneurysm size, and aneurysm location. The rate of procedure-related complications did not differ between the PED (7.5%) and the coil group (7.5%; P =1). At the latest follow-up, a significantly higher proportion of aneurysms treated with PED (86%) achieved complete obliteration compared with coiled aneurysms (41%; P <0.001). In multivariable analysis, coiling was an independent predictor of nonocclusion. Retreatment was necessary in fewer patients in the PED group (2.8%) than the coil group (37%; P <0.001). A similar proportion of patients attained a favorable outcome (modified Rankin Scale, 0–2) in the PED group (92%) and in the coil group (94%; P =0.8). Conclusions—: The PED provides higher aneurysm occlusion rates than coiling, with no additional morbidity and similar clinical outcomes. These findings suggest that the PED might be a preferred treatment option for large unruptured saccular aneurysms.