Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Cranial nerve deficits in giant cavernous carotid aneurysms and their relation to aneurysm morphology and location


Durner, G; Piano, M; Lenga, P; Mielke, D; Hohaus, C; Guhl, S; Maldaner, Nicolai; Burkhardt, J K; Pedro, M T; Lehmberg, J; Rufenacht, D; Bijlenga, P; Etminan, N; Krauss, J K; Boccardi, E; Hänggi, D; Vajkoczy, P; Dengler, Julius; Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Study Group (2018). Cranial nerve deficits in giant cavernous carotid aneurysms and their relation to aneurysm morphology and location. Acta Neurochirurgica, 160(8):1653-1660.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Giant cavernous carotid aneurysms (GCCAs) usually exert substantial mass effect on adjacent intracavernous cranial nerves. Since predictors of cranial nerve deficits (CNDs) in patients with GCCA are unknown, we designed a study to identify associations between CND and GCCA morphology and the location of mass effect.
METHODS: This study was based on data from the prospective clinical and imaging databases of the Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Registry. We used magnetic resonance imaging and digital subtraction angiography to examine GCCA volume, presence of partial thrombosis (PT), GCCA origins, and the location of mass effect. We also documented whether CND was present.
RESULTS: We included 36 GCCA in 34 patients, which had been entered into the registry by eight participating centers between January 2009 and March 2016. The prevalence of CND was 69.4%, with one CND in 41.7% and more than one in 27.5%. The prevalence of PT was 33.3%. The aneurysm origin was most frequently located at the anterior genu (52.8%). The prevalence of CND did not differ between aneurysm origins (p = 0.29). Intracavernous mass effect was lateral in 58.3%, mixed medial/lateral in 27.8%, and purely medial in 13.9%. CND occurred significantly more often in GCCA with lateral (81.0%) or mixed medial/lateral (70.0%) mass effect than in GCCA with medial mass effect (20.0%; p = 0.03). After adjusting our data for the effects of the location of mass effect, we found no association between the prevalence of CND and aneurysm volume (odds ratio (OR) 1.30 (0.98-1.71); p = 0.07), the occurrence of PT (OR 0.64 (0.07-5.73); p = 0.69), or patient age (OR 1.02 (95% CI 0.95-1.09); p = 0.59).
CONCLUSIONS: Distinguishing between medial versus lateral location of mass effect may be more helpful than measuring aneurysm volumes or examining aneurysm thrombosis in understanding why some patients with GCCA present with CND while others do not.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NO: NCT02066493 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Giant cavernous carotid aneurysms (GCCAs) usually exert substantial mass effect on adjacent intracavernous cranial nerves. Since predictors of cranial nerve deficits (CNDs) in patients with GCCA are unknown, we designed a study to identify associations between CND and GCCA morphology and the location of mass effect.
METHODS: This study was based on data from the prospective clinical and imaging databases of the Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Registry. We used magnetic resonance imaging and digital subtraction angiography to examine GCCA volume, presence of partial thrombosis (PT), GCCA origins, and the location of mass effect. We also documented whether CND was present.
RESULTS: We included 36 GCCA in 34 patients, which had been entered into the registry by eight participating centers between January 2009 and March 2016. The prevalence of CND was 69.4%, with one CND in 41.7% and more than one in 27.5%. The prevalence of PT was 33.3%. The aneurysm origin was most frequently located at the anterior genu (52.8%). The prevalence of CND did not differ between aneurysm origins (p = 0.29). Intracavernous mass effect was lateral in 58.3%, mixed medial/lateral in 27.8%, and purely medial in 13.9%. CND occurred significantly more often in GCCA with lateral (81.0%) or mixed medial/lateral (70.0%) mass effect than in GCCA with medial mass effect (20.0%; p = 0.03). After adjusting our data for the effects of the location of mass effect, we found no association between the prevalence of CND and aneurysm volume (odds ratio (OR) 1.30 (0.98-1.71); p = 0.07), the occurrence of PT (OR 0.64 (0.07-5.73); p = 0.69), or patient age (OR 1.02 (95% CI 0.95-1.09); p = 0.59).
CONCLUSIONS: Distinguishing between medial versus lateral location of mass effect may be more helpful than measuring aneurysm volumes or examining aneurysm thrombosis in understanding why some patients with GCCA present with CND while others do not.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NO: NCT02066493 ( clinicaltrials.gov ).

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
1 citation in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

0 downloads since deposited on 24 Aug 2018
0 downloads since 12 months

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Neurosurgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Uncontrolled Keywords:Surgery, Clinical Neurology, Aneurysm volume; Cavernous carotid aneurysm; Giant intracranial aneurysms; Partial thrombosis
Language:English
Date:August 2018
Deposited On:24 Aug 2018 17:14
Last Modified:07 May 2019 11:50
Publisher:Springer
ISSN:0001-6268
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-018-3580-2
PubMed ID:29948299

Download