The combined approach to intracranial aneurysm treatment

Brian L. Alexander MD , Howard A. Riina MD
{"title":"The combined approach to intracranial aneurysm treatment","authors":"Brian L. Alexander MD ,&nbsp;Howard A. Riina MD","doi":"10.1016/j.surneu.2009.06.027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>A consecutive series of patients with intracranial aneurysms in the practice of one neurovascular surgeon was retrospectively reviewed to illustrate that one physician can become proficient in microneurosurgery as well as endovascular surgery and achieve favorable outcomes in both disciplines. This supports one model of training for cerebrovascular surgeons that includes the complimentary practice of open microneurovascular surgery with endovascular surgery.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The senior author (HAR) treated 351 patients with 413 aneurysms between July 2001 and March 2007. Of these, 172 patients (216 aneurysms) were treated with open microneurosurgical techniques and 179 patients (197 aneurysms) were treated using endovascular techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Complete obliteration was attained in 94.3% of clipped aneurysms, and 61.9% and 65.9% of coiled aneurysms immediately and after at least 6 months of follow-up, respectively. At latest evaluation, 93% of endovascular patients and 90% of microneurosurgical patients had good clinical outcomes (GOS, 4 or 5; mean follow-up, 23 months; combines ruptured and unruptured cohorts). Procedure-related mortality included 1 surgical patient and 2 endovascular patients.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Because the fields of microvascular and endovascular surgeries are both technically complex, there has been concern that hybrid cerebrovascular surgeons cannot perform each technique with the skill necessary to achieve good outcomes. When compared to clipping and coiling reviews in the neurosurgical literature, we illustrate that one hybrid neurovascular surgeon is capable of attaining great facility in both techniques and that this type of physician will represent one practice model of cerebrovascular specialist in the future. This has potential implications for the training of hybrid cerebrovascular surgeons.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":22153,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Neurology","volume":"72 6","pages":"Pages 596-606"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.surneu.2009.06.027","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009030190900617X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Background

A consecutive series of patients with intracranial aneurysms in the practice of one neurovascular surgeon was retrospectively reviewed to illustrate that one physician can become proficient in microneurosurgery as well as endovascular surgery and achieve favorable outcomes in both disciplines. This supports one model of training for cerebrovascular surgeons that includes the complimentary practice of open microneurovascular surgery with endovascular surgery.

Methods

The senior author (HAR) treated 351 patients with 413 aneurysms between July 2001 and March 2007. Of these, 172 patients (216 aneurysms) were treated with open microneurosurgical techniques and 179 patients (197 aneurysms) were treated using endovascular techniques.

Results

Complete obliteration was attained in 94.3% of clipped aneurysms, and 61.9% and 65.9% of coiled aneurysms immediately and after at least 6 months of follow-up, respectively. At latest evaluation, 93% of endovascular patients and 90% of microneurosurgical patients had good clinical outcomes (GOS, 4 or 5; mean follow-up, 23 months; combines ruptured and unruptured cohorts). Procedure-related mortality included 1 surgical patient and 2 endovascular patients.

Conclusions

Because the fields of microvascular and endovascular surgeries are both technically complex, there has been concern that hybrid cerebrovascular surgeons cannot perform each technique with the skill necessary to achieve good outcomes. When compared to clipping and coiling reviews in the neurosurgical literature, we illustrate that one hybrid neurovascular surgeon is capable of attaining great facility in both techniques and that this type of physician will represent one practice model of cerebrovascular specialist in the future. This has potential implications for the training of hybrid cerebrovascular surgeons.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
联合入路治疗颅内动脉瘤
背景:回顾性回顾了一名神经血管外科医生连续治疗的颅内动脉瘤患者,以说明一名医生可以熟练掌握微神经外科和血管内外科,并在这两个学科中取得良好的结果。这支持了脑血管外科医生的一种培训模式,包括开放微神经血管手术和血管内手术的补充实践。方法自2001年7月至2007年3月,作者共治疗351例动脉瘤患者413例。其中172例(216个动脉瘤)采用开放微神经外科技术治疗,179例(197个动脉瘤)采用血管内技术治疗。结果94.3%的夹闭动脉瘤立即完全闭塞,61.9%的夹闭动脉瘤立即完全闭塞,65.9%的夹闭动脉瘤在随访至少6个月后完全闭塞。最新评估显示,93%的血管内患者和90%的微神经外科患者临床预后良好(GOS, 4或5;平均随访23个月;合并破裂和未破裂队列)。手术相关死亡率包括1例手术患者和2例血管内患者。由于微血管手术和血管内手术在技术上都很复杂,因此人们一直担心,混合脑血管外科医生无法用所需的技能来完成每一项手术,以达到良好的效果。当与神经外科文献中的夹持和盘绕回顾进行比较时,我们说明了一名混合神经血管外科医生能够在这两种技术中获得很大的优势,并且这种类型的医生将代表未来脑血管专家的一种实践模式。这对混合型脑血管外科医生的培训具有潜在的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Surgical Neurology
Surgical Neurology 医学-临床神经学
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cardiac ventricular myosin and slow skeletal myosin exhibit dissimilar chemomechanical properties despite bearing the same myosin heavy chain isoform. Moyamoya disease. PNIPAAM modified mesoporous hydroxyapatite for sustained osteogenic drug release and promoting cell attachment. Biomedical research Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1