1221

The prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the adult population is ≈3%.1 With increasing availability of

modern imaging techniques, such as magnetic resonance angi-ography and computed tomography angiography, an increas-ing number of aneurysms is being detected.2 The current endovascular or surgical treatment options to prevent aneurys-mal rupture with its devastating consequences are invasive and carry considerable risks of complications.3,4 For most small aneurysms in the anterior circulation, the predicted risk of rupture is much smaller than the risk of treatment complica-tions, and therefore, many of these small aneurysms are left untreated. However, a small proportion of these aneurysms do rupture, and because these aneurysms by far outnumber other aneurysms, most instances of aneurysmal subarachnoid hem-orrhage (SAH) come from small aneurysms in the anterior cir-culation.5,6 Therefore, we need better risk prediction. Because

the average 5-year risk of rupture for these small aneurysms is so small, tens if not hundreds of thousands patient-years are needed to have enough outcome events to improve exist-ing prediction tools.7,8 Thus, surrogate markers of rupture are needed to facilitate improvement of risk prediction models. Such markers could also be used as surrogate outcome mea-surement in phase II trials evaluating new, noninvasive treat-ment strategies aiming to reduce the risk of rupture. Aneurysm growth may be such a marker and has already been the subject of research in several previous studies.9–17 However, despite strong associations between aneurysm size or aneurysm growth and rupture, uncertainty exists if aneurysm growth is indeed a good surrogate marker for aneurysm rupture in cur-rent risk assessment models.

The PHASES score is a model that provides absolute risks of rupture for aneurysms based on 6 easily retrievable factors

Background and Purpose—Growth of an intracranial aneurysm occurs in around 10% of patients at 2-year follow-up imaging and may be associated with aneurysm rupture. We investigated whether PHASES, a score providing absolute risks of aneurysm rupture based on 6 easily retrievable risk factors, also predicts aneurysm growth.

Methods—In a multicenter cohort of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms and follow-up imaging with computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography, we performed univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses for the predictors of the PHASES score at baseline, with aneurysm growth as outcome. We calculated hazard ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI), with the PHASES score as continuous variable and after division into quartiles.

Results—We included 557 patients with 734 unruptured aneurysms. Eighty-nine (12%) aneurysms in 87 patients showed growth during a median follow-up of 2.7 patient-years (range 0.5–10.8). Per point increase in PHASES score, hazard ratio for aneurysm growth was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.22–1.43). With the lowest quartile of the PHASES score (0–1) as reference, hazard ratios were for the second (PHASES 2–3) 1.07 (95% CI, 0.49–2.32), the third (PHASES 4) 2.29 (95% CI, 1.05–4.95), and the fourth quartile (PHASES 5–14) 2.85 (95% CI, 1.43–5.67).

Conclusions—Higher PHASES scores were associated with an increased risk of aneurysm growth. Because higher PHASES scores also predict aneurysm rupture, our findings suggest that aneurysm growth can be used as surrogate outcome measure of aneurysm rupture in follow-up studies on risk prediction or interventions aimed to reduce the risk of rupture. (Stroke. 2015;46:1221-1226. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008198.)

Key Words: follow-up ◼ growth ◼ imaging ◼ PHASES ◼ unruptured aneurysm

PHASES Score for Prediction of Intracranial Aneurysm Growth

Daan Backes, MD; Mervyn D.I. Vergouwen, MD, PhD; Andreas T. Tiel Groenestege, MD; A. Stijntje E. Bor, MD, PhD; Birgitta K. Velthuis, MD, PhD; Jacoba P. Greving, PhD;

Ale Algra, MD, PhD; Marieke J.H. Wermer, MD, PhD; Marianne A.A. van Walderveen, MD, PhD; Karel G. terBrugge, MD; Ronit Agid, MD;

Gabriel J.E. Rinkel, MD, FRCPE

Received November 19, 2014; final revision received February 2, 2015; accepted February 17, 2015.From the Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus (D.B., M.D.I.V., A.T.T.G., A.S.E.B., A.A., G.J.E.R.), Department of

Radiology (B.K.V.), and Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care (J.P.G., A.A.), University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Departments of Neurology (M.J.H.W.) and Radiology (M.A.A.v.W.), Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; and Division of Neuroradiology, Department of Medical Imaging, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Canada (K.G.t.B., R.A.).

Correspondence to Daan Backes, MD, Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Room H02.128, PO Box 85 500, 3500 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands. E-mail D.Backes-2@umcutrecht.nl

© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.

Stroke is available at http://stroke.ahajournals.org DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008198

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

1222 Stroke May 2015

(population, hypertension, age, size of aneurysm, earlier SAH from another aneurysm, site of aneurysm).7 We assessed whether this score also predicts aneurysm growth.

MethodsStudy Population and Data ExtractionApproval for this study was obtained from the local Institutional Review Board of the participating centers. Data from consecutive pa-tients with an unruptured intracranial aneurysm were prospectively collected at 3 tertiary care referral hospitals: Toronto Western Hospital, Canada; University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands; and Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands. From these databases, we included all patients aged ≥18 years with ≥1 unrup-tured intracranial saccular aneurysms and ≥6 months of radiological follow-up with magnetic resonance angiography or computed tomog-raphy angiography. The indication and time-interval for follow-up imaging was determined by the local treating physician. Data on sex, age, geographical region, history of hypertension, and history of SAH at the time of aneurysm detection were retrieved from the electronic patient files. A history of hypertension was defined as a diagnosis of hypertension previously made by another physician or use of antihy-pertensive drugs. From all follow-up imaging, we retrieved the date of imaging and imaging modality (magnetic resonance angiography or computed tomography angiography).

ImagingThe baseline and the last imaging were assessed at the end of the follow-up study by one of 3 observers (DB, ASEB, ATTG) who were blinded for clinical data and patient-specific risk factors for aneurysm growth but not for the dates of the imaging studies. Aneurysm rup-ture was not an outcome event. If aneurysm rupture occurred during follow-up, the last imaging study before aneurysm rupture was used to assess whether growth had occurred. Assessment of imaging was done per patient within a single session by the same observer to avoid interobserver variability. Imaging data were reviewed for aneurysm location and divided into 3 categories according to the PHASES score: (1) internal carotid artery; (2) middle cerebral artery; and (3) anterior and posterior communicating artery or posterior circulation (the vertebrobasilar arteries and branches). Aneurysm height and width were measured on 3-dimension rotational images on a 0.1 mm scale. Aneurysm height was defined as the maximum distance from the aneurysm neck to the aneurysm dome, and aneurysm width was defined as the maximum width measured perpendicular to the maxi-mum aneurysm height (Figure 1). Aneurysm growth was defined as

(1) growth ≥1.0 mm in at least 1 direction for identical or different imaging modalities; (2) growth ≥0.5 mm in 2 directions for identi-cal imaging modalities; (3) indisputable change in aneurysm shape (ie, change from regular shape to irregular shape). An example of aneurysm growth is shown in Figure 2. All aneurysms with possible aneurysm growth were reviewed in a consensus meeting with a neu-roradiologist (B.K.V. or M.A.A.v.W.) who was not aware of the study objectives. If consensus on aneurysm growth based on the baseline and last imaging study was reached, all imaging studies in between were evaluated for aneurysm growth. The time elapsed between the baseline imaging and the first follow-up imaging that showed an-eurysm growth was used for further analysis. In aneurysms with-out growth, the time elapsed between the first and the last imaging was used. We used Philips Intellispace Portal software from Philips Healthcare Netherlands to evaluate all imaging studies.

Statistical AnalysisThe PHASES score for each aneurysm was calculated at baseline by summing up the number of points associated with each predictor: age (0, <70 years; 1, ≥70 years), hypertension (0, no; 1, yes), history of SAH (0, no; 1, yes), aneurysm size (0, <7.0 mm; 3, 7.0–9.9 mm; 6, 10.0–19.9 mm; 10, ≥20.0 mm), aneurysm site (0, internal carotid ar-tery; 2, middle cerebral artery; 4, anterior cerebral arteries, posterior communicating artery, and posterior circulation), and geographical re-gion (0, North American, European [other than Finnish]; 3, Japanese; 5, Finnish).7 Because all patients included in this study were North American or European (other than Finnish), all patients scored zero points for geographical region. First, we performed an aneurysm-based univariable and multivariable Cox regression analysis for the predictors of the PHASES score with aneurysm growth as outcome and calcu-lated hazard ratios with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Second, we performed Cox regression analysis with the PHASES score as a continuous variable. Third, we repeated this analysis after division of the PHASES score within our cohort into quartiles. We calculated the concordance (c) statistic to express the extent of discrimination of the Cox regression models. The c-statistic for prognostic models is typically between 0.60 and 0.85.18 In addition, we did a patient-based sensitivity analysis, in which the only largest aneurysm and its loca-tion were used to calculate the PHASES score in patients with multiple intracranial aneurysms. We plotted Kaplan–Meier growth-free survival curves to visualize the association between quartiles of the PHASES score and aneurysm growth. Missing data for hypertension (4% miss-ing values) and history of SAH (2% missing values) were assigned by multiple imputation with linear regression method (multivariable anal-ysis) available in SPSS version 20.19 A sensitivity analysis was done in which all patients with a missing value were excluded.

Figure 1. Example of aneurysm measurements. A, MRI shows an unruptured intracranial aneurysm located on the right middle cerebral artery (MCA) bifurcation on a time of flight sequence in Philips Intellispace Portal. B, Window settings are adjusted according to our mea-surement protocol (window width and window level equal to the Hounsfield unit density measured within the aneurysm). The imaging studies were linked, so that both imaging studies could be rotated in the same axis in 3 dimensions to establish the cross-sectional pro-jection in which the maximum aneurysm height (H) and width (W) were visualized. Aneurysm height was measured from the center of the aneurysm neck (N) to the aneurysm dome, and aneurysm width was measured perpendicular to the aneurysm height.

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

Backes et al PHASES Score and Aneurysm Growth 1223

ResultsBaseline characteristics of the 557 included patients with 734 saccular unruptured intracranial aneurysms are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The mean age at aneurysm detection was 55 years (SD 11 years) and 417 patients (75%) were women. In total, 415 patients had 1 unruptured aneurysm, 110 patients had 2 unruptured aneurysms, 29 patients had 3 unruptured aneurysms, and 3 patients had 4 unruptured aneurysms. Six patients (1%) had an SAH from a known aneurysm dur-ing follow-up, with a median PHASES score at baseline of 6 (range 4–9). Eighty-nine aneurysms (12%) in 86 patients (16%) showed aneurysm growth during a median follow-up of 2.7 patient-years (range 0.5–10.8 years).

The results of the univariable and multivariable Cox logis-tic regression analysis of the predictors of the PHASES score are shown in Table 3. Aneurysm size was significantly asso-ciated with aneurysm growth in the multivariable analysis,

with increasing hazard ratios observed in larger aneurysms (Table 3). The median PHASES score per aneurysm was 4 (range 0–14). Aneurysm-based Cox regression analysis with the PHASES score as continuous variable showed a hazard ratio of 1.32 (95% CI, 1.22–1.43) for aneurysm growth per point increase in PHASES score, with a c-statistic of 0.68 (95% CI, 0.61–0.74). An increasing hazard ratio for aneurysm growth was detected when the PHASES score was divided into quartiles, with a PHASES score of 0 to 1 as reference (Table 4; Figure 3), with a c-statistic of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.58–0.70). The patient-based sensitivity analysis showed simi-lar results, with a hazard ratio of 1.29 (95% CI, 1.19–1.39) for aneurysm growth per point increase in PHASES score, and increasing hazard ratios after division into quartiles (PHASES 0–1 as reference; PHASES 2–3: hazard ratios 1.02 [95% CI, 0.46–2.23]; PHASES 4: hazard ratios 1.86 [95% CI, 0.84–4.15]; PHASES 5–14: hazard ratios 2.73 [95% CI,

Figure 2. Example of aneurysm growth. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) in 2004 (top row) shows an unruptured intracranial aneurysm of 1.9 mm (height) by 2.2 mm (width) located on the anterior cerebral artery (ACA) A1-A2 bifurcation. Follow-up CTA in 2010 (bottom row) shows aneu-rysm growth (height 3.2 mm, width 4.1 mm). A and C, Default window setting. Window settings are adjusted for aneurysm measurements in B and D.

Table 1. Patient Characteristics

Utrecht Toronto Leiden Total

Patient Characteristics n=305 n=189 n=63 n=557

Median follow-up in years (range) 3.8 (0.5–10.8) 1.8 (0.5–7.1) 2.6 (0.5–6.8) 2.7 (0.5–10.8)

Female 233 (76%) 147 (78%) 37 (59%) 417 (75%)

Median age years (range) 54 (24–83) 56 (18–78) 57 (41–84) 55 (18–84)

Hypertension 113 (40%) 78 (41%) 29 (46%) 220 (41%)*

Previous SAH 140 (46%) 29 (16%) 17 (27%) 186 (34%)†

Patients with aneurysm growth 50 (16%) 32 (17%) 4 (6%) 86 (16%)

SAH indicates subarachnoid hemorrhage.*Missing value for 20 cases.†Missing value for 9 cases.

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

1224 Stroke May 2015

1.37–5.45]). Sensitivity analysis with exclusion of cases with missing values yielded similar results.

DiscussionThis study shows that the PHASES risk score, which provides 5-year absolute risks of aneurysmal rupture, can also be used to identify aneurysms with a high relative risk of aneurysm growth.7 Increasing PHASES scores were associated with increasing hazard ratios for growth.

The aneurysm growth rate of 12% during a median follow-up of 2.7 years in our study is in line with other studies on aneurysm growth, which found aneurysm growth rates of 4% to 45% with a mean follow-up of 1.5 to 18.9 years.9–12,15,17,20 In contrast with our study, these previous studies lacked time-dependent regression analysis in which follow-up duration

was taken into account.9–17,20 As in previous studies, initial aneurysm size was the strongest predictor for aneurysm growth, with larger initial aneurysm size associated with an increased risk of aneurysm growth.10–13,16 With regard to aneurysm location, previous studies showed a trend toward a higher risk of growth for aneurysms located in the posterior circulation.9,10,12,15 We pooled aneurysms in the posterior cir-culation and anterior communicating arteries according to the PHASES score and observed the same trend.

In addition to the risk factors included in the PHASES score, several other risk factors for aneurysm growth have been described, such as female sex,20 cigarette smoking,16,20 a family history of SAH,11 irregular aneurysm shape,13,21 and the presence of multiple aneurysms.9,11 Implementation of addi-tional (aneurysm-related) risk factors for aneurysm rupture, such as aspect ratio (aneurysm neck-to-dome length/neck-width),22–28 size ratio (maximum aneurysm diameter/average vessel diameter),29–31 and irregular aneurysm shape,13,32–36 might improve current rupture risk assessment. However, assessment whether implementation of additional risk factors improves risk prediction has several difficulties, such as the need of large numbers of patients-years as a result of an annual rupture rate of ≈1%.7,8 By using aneurysm growth with a rate of 12% during a median follow-up of ≈3 years as surrogate

Table 3. Aneurysm-Based Univariable and Multivariable Cox Regression Analysis of Predictors of Aneurysm Growth

PredictorUnivariable

Analysis HR (95% CI)Multivariable

Analysis HR (95% CI)

Hypertension 1.40 (0.92–2.12) 1.40 (0.92–2.15)

Age ≥70 y 2.68 (1.33–5.41) 0.99 (0.45–2.18)

Size of aneurysm

<7.0 mm Reference Reference

7.0–9.9 mm 5.43 (2.77–10.64) 4.14 (2.04–8.37)

10.0–19.9 mm 9.37 (4.79–18.32) 8.06 (3.89–16.72)

≥20.0 mm 12.45 (4.46–34.74) 12.92 (4.11–40.62)

Earlier SAH from another aneurysm

0.45 (0.28–0.72) 0.62 (0.37–1.03)

Site of aneurysm

ICA Reference Reference

MCA 0.93 (0.52–1.67) 1.11 (0.60–2.04)

ACA/PCom/posterior 1.46 (0.85–2.50) 1.53 (0.86–2.71)

ACA indicates anterior cerebral arteries (including anterior communicating artery); CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; ICA, internal carotid artery; MCA, middle cerebral artery; PCom, posterior communicating artery; posterior, posterior circulation arteries; and SAH, subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Table 4. Number of Aneurysms With Aneurysm Growth According to PHASES Score in Quartiles

PHASES Quartile (Score)

Aneurysms With Growth/Total

No. of Aneurysm

Percentage of Aneurysms

With Growth (95% CI)Hazard Ratio

(95% CI)

I (0–1) 10/149 7 (3–12) Reference

II (2–3) 18/217 8 (5–13) 1.07 (0.49–2.32)

III (4) 18/125 14 (8–21) 2.29 (1.05–4.95)

IV (5–14) 43/243 18 (13–23) 2.85 (1.43–5.67)

CI indicates confidence interval; and PHASES, population, hypertension, age, size of aneurysm, earlier subarachnoid hemorrhage from another aneurysm, site of aneurysm.

Table 2. Aneursym Characteristics

Utrecht Toronto Leiden Total

Aneursym Characteristics n=403 n=246 n=85 n=734

Aneurysm site

ICA 89 (22%) 86 (35%) 14 (17%) 189 (26%)

MCA 167 (41%) 67 (27%) 32 (38%) 266 (36%)

ACA/PCom/posterior 147 (37%) 93 (38%) 39 (46%) 279 (38%)

Initial aneurysm size

<7.0 mm 377 (94%) 197 (80%) 85 (100%) 659 (90%)

7.0–9.9 mm 19 (5%) 25 (10%) 0 (0%) 44 (6%)

10.0–19.9 mm 6 (2%) 15 (6%) 0 (0%) 21 (3%)

≥20.0 mm 1 (<1%) 9 (4%) 0 (0%) 10 (1%)

Aneurysms growth during FU 53 (13%) 32 (13%) 4 (5%) 89 (12%)

ACA indicates anterior cerebral arteries (including anterior cerebral artery, anterior communicating artery, and pericallosal artery); ICA, internal carotid artery (excluding posterior communicating artery); MCA, middle cerebral artery; PCom, posterior communicating artery; and posterior, posterior circulation (including vertebral artery, basilar artery, cerebellar arteries, and posterior cerebral artery).

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

Backes et al PHASES Score and Aneurysm Growth 1225

marker, the efficiency of further studies on risk prediction can be greatly facilitated.

A limitation of this study is that aneurysm growth was determined with imaging studies with variable time inter-vals, with the date of the first imaging study with aneurysm growth as end point. Because it is likely that aneurysms have long periods without aneurysm growth and short peri-ods with aneurysm growth, the date of the first imaging study with aneurysm growth will be an approximation of the actual time of growth.37,38 Another limitation is that follow-up imaging of unruptured aneurysms was performed in a selected group of patients, namely in patients in whom the benefit of preventive aneurysm treatment was thought not to outweigh the risks of complications. This selection could have resulted in an underestimation of the risk of growth for the entire group of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms. A last limitation is that, despite the multicenter and bicontinental study population, we could not include patients from Japan and Finland in the current study, which are populations with a higher risk of rupture according to

the PHASES score.7 The strength of our study is the use of a strict protocol for the measurement of aneurysm growth, which was discussed in a consensus meeting with an expe-rienced neuroradiologist. Furthermore, our study describes the largest cohort of patients with data on natural history of aneurysm growth to date, with patients included from 3 centers and 2 continents.

Our results show that higher PHASES scores are associ-ated with an increased risk of aneurysm growth. Because higher PHASES scores also predict aneurysm rupture, these findings suggest that aneurysm growth is a valid surrogate outcome measure for aneurysm rupture in follow-up studies on risk prediction or interventions aimed to reduce the risk of rupture.

AcknowledgmentsWe thank Elbert H. Witvoet, MD, for his help with data collection.

DisclosuresNone.

Figure 3. Kaplan–Meier growth-free survival curves according to PHASES score. The number of aneurysms at risk per PHASES quartile (I, II, III, IV) are indicated under the x-axis. PHASES indicates population, hypertension, age, size of aneurysm, earlier subarachnoid hem-orrhage from another aneurysm, site of aneurysm.

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

1226 Stroke May 2015

References 1. Vlak MH, Algra A, Brandenburg R, Rinkel GJ. Prevalence of unruptured

intracranial aneurysms, with emphasis on sex, age, comorbidity, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2011;10:626–636. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70109-0.

2. Gabriel RA, Kim H, Sidney S, McCulloch CE, Singh V, Johnston SC, et al. Ten-year detection rate of brain arteriovenous malformations in a large, multiethnic, defined population. Stroke. 2010;41:21–26. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.566018.

3. Naggara ON, White PM, Guilbert F, Roy D, Weill A, Raymond J. Endovascular treatment of intracranial unruptured aneurysms: system-atic review and meta-analysis of the literature on safety and efficacy. Radiology. 2010;256:887–897. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10091982.

4. Kotowski M, Naggara O, Darsaut TE, Nolet S, Gevry G, Kouznetsov E, et al. Safety and occlusion rates of surgical treatment of unruptured intra-cranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the litera-ture from 1990 to 2011. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013;84:42–48. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2011-302068.

5. Weir B, Disney L, Karrison T. Sizes of ruptured and unruptured aneu-rysms in relation to their sites and the ages of patients. J Neurosurg. 2002;96:64–70. doi: 10.3171/jns.2002.96.1.0064.

6. Forget TR Jr, Benitez R, Veznedaroglu E, Sharan A, Mitchell W, Silva M, et al. A review of size and location of ruptured intracranial aneu-rysms. Neurosurgery. 2001;49:1322–1325, discussion 1325.

7. Greving JP, Wermer MJ, Brown RD Jr, Morita A, Juvela S, Yonekura M, et al. Development of the PHASES score for prediction of risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms: a pooled analysis of six prospec-tive cohort studies. Lancet Neurol. 2014;13:59–66. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70263-1.

8. Juvela S, Poussa K, Lehto H, Porras M. Natural history of unrup-tured intracranial aneurysms: a long-term follow-up study. Stroke. 2013;44:2414–2421. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001838.

9. Matsumoto K, Oshino S, Sasaki M, Tsuruzono K, Taketsuna S, Yoshimine T. Incidence of growth and rupture of unruptured intracranial aneurysms followed by serial MRA. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2013;155:211–216. doi: 10.1007/s00701-012-1566-z.

10. Burns JD, Huston J III, Layton KF, Piepgras DG, Brown RD Jr. Intracranial aneurysm enlargement on serial magnetic resonance angi-ography: frequency and risk factors. Stroke. 2009;40:406–411. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.519165.

11. Miyazawa N, Akiyama I, Yamagata Z. Risk factors for growth of unrup-tured intracranial aneurysms: follow-up study by serial 0.5-T magnetic resonance angiography. Neurosurgery. 2006;58:1047–1053, discussion 1047. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000217366.02567.D2.

12. Matsubara S, Hadeishi H, Suzuki A, Yasui N, Nishimura H. Incidence and risk factors for the growth of unruptured cerebral aneurysms: obser-vation using serial computerized tomography angiography. J Neurosurg. 2004;101:908–914. doi: 10.3171/jns.2004.101.6.0908.

13. Phan TG, Huston J III, Brown RD Jr, Wiebers DO, Piepgras DG. Intracranial saccular aneurysm enlargement determined using serial magnetic resonance angiography. J Neurosurg. 2002;97:1023–1028. doi: 10.3171/jns.2002.97.5.1023.

14. Wermer MJ, van der Schaaf IC, Velthuis BK, Majoie CB, Albrecht KW, Rinkel GJ. Yield of short-term follow-up CT/MR angiography for small aneurysms detected at screening. Stroke. 2006;37:414–418. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000199077.06390.35.

15. Chien A, Liang F, Sayre J, Salamon N, Villablanca P, Viñuela F. Enlargement of small, asymptomatic, unruptured intracranial aneurysms in patients with no history of subarachnoid hemorrhage: the different fac-tors related to the growth of single and multiple aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 2013;119:190–197. doi: 10.3171/2013.3.JNS121469.

16. Villablanca JP, Duckwiler GR, Jahan R, Tateshima S, Martin NA, Frazee J, et al. Natural history of asymptomatic unruptured cerebral aneurysms evaluated at CT angiography: growth and rupture incidence and correla-tion with epidemiologic risk factors. Radiology. 2013;269:258–265. doi: 10.1148/radiol.13121188.

17. Mehan WA Jr, Romero JM, Hirsch JA, Sabbag DJ, Gonzalez RG, Heit JJ, et al. Unruptured intracranial aneurysms conservatively fol-lowed with serial CT angiography: could morphology and growth predict rupture? J Neurointerv Surg. 2014;6:761–766. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2013-010944.

18. Royston P, Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y. Prognosis and prognos-tic research: Developing a prognostic model. BMJ. 2009;338:b604.

19. Janssen KJ, Donders AR, Harrell FE Jr, Vergouwe Y, Chen Q, Grobbee DE, et al. Missing covariate data in medical research: to impute is bet-ter than to ignore. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:721–727. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.008.

20. Juvela S, Poussa K, Porras M. Factors affecting formation and growth of intracranial aneurysms: a long-term follow-up study. Stroke. 2001;32:485–491.

21. Bor AS, Tiel Groenestege AT, terBrugge KG, Agid R, Velthuis BK, Rinkel GJ, et al. Clinical, radiological, and flow-related risk factors for growth of untreated, unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Stroke. 2015;46:42–48. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.005963.

22. Amenta PS, Yadla S, Campbell PG, Maltenfort MG, Dey S, Ghosh S, et al. Analysis of nonmodifiable risk factors for intracranial aneurysm rupture in a large, retrospective cohort. Neurosurgery. 2012;70:693–701.

23. Weir B, Amidei C, Kongable G, Findlay JM, Kassell NF, Kelly J, et al. The aspect ratio (dome/neck) of ruptured and unruptured aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 2003;99:447–451. doi: 10.3171/jns.2003.99.3.0447.

24. Ujiie H, Tamano Y, Sasaki K, Hori T. Is the aspect ratio a reliable index for predicting the rupture of a saccular aneurysm? Neurosurgery. 2001;48:495–502, discussion 502.

25. Lin N, Ho A, Gross BA, Pieper S, Frerichs KU, Day AL, et al. Differences in simple morphological variables in ruptured and unruptured mid-dle cerebral artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 2012;117:913–919. doi: 10.3171/2012.7.JNS111766.

26. Nader-Sepahi A, Casimiro M, Sen J, Kitchen ND. Is aspect ratio a reliable predictor of intracranial aneurysm rupture? Neurosurgery. 2004;54:1343–1347, discussion 1347.

27. You SH, Kong DS, Kim JS, Jeon P, Kim KH, Roh HK, et al. Characteristic features of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: predictive risk factors for aneurysm rupture. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2010;81:479–484. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.169573.

28. Ryu CW, Kwon OK, Koh JS, Kim EJ. Analysis of aneurysm rupture in relation to the geometric indices: aspect ratio, volume, and vol-ume-to-neck ratio. Neuroradiology. 2011;53:883–889. doi: 10.1007/s00234-010-0804-4.

29. Dhar S, Tremmel M, Mocco J, Kim M, Yamamoto J, Siddiqui AH, et al. Morphology parameters for intracranial aneurysm rupture risk assess-ment. Neurosurgery. 2008;63:185–196, discussion 196. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000316847.64140.81.

30. Kashiwazaki D, Kuroda S; Sapporo SAH Study Group. Size ratio can highly predict rupture risk in intracranial small (<5 mm) aneurysms. Stroke. 2013;44:2169–2173. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001138.

31. Rahman M, Smietana J, Hauck E, Hoh B, Hopkins N, Siddiqui A, et al. Size ratio correlates with intracranial aneurysm rupture status: a prospective study. Stroke. 2010;41:916–920. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.574244.

32. Asari S, Ohmoto T. Natural history and risk factors of unruptured cere-bral aneurysms. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1993;95:205–214.

33. Morita A, Kirino T, Hashi K, Aoki N, Fukuhara S, Hashimoto N, et al; UCAS Japan Investigators. The natural course of unruptured cerebral aneurysms in a Japanese cohort. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2474–2482. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1113260.

34. Rohde S, Lahmann K, Beck J, Nafe R, Yan B, Raabe A, et al. Fourier analysis of intracranial aneurysms: towards an objective and quantitative evaluation of the shape of aneurysms. Neuroradiology. 2005;47:121–126. doi: 10.1007/s00234-004-1324-x.

35. Matsukawa H, Uemura A, Fujii M, Kamo M, Takahashi O, Sumiyoshi S. Morphological and clinical risk factors for the rupture of anterior communicating artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg. 2013;118:978–983. doi: 10.3171/2012.11.JNS121210.

36. Backes D, Vergouwen MD, Velthuis BK, van der Schaaf IC, Bor AS, Algra A, et al. Difference in aneurysm characteristics between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms in patients with multiple intra-cranial aneurysms. Stroke. 2014;45:1299–1303. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.004421.

37. Koffijberg H, Buskens E, Algra A, Wermer MJ, Rinkel GJ. Growth rates of intracranial aneurysms: exploring constancy. J Neurosurg. 2008;109:176–185. doi: 10.3171/JNS/2008/109/8/0176.

38. Chmayssani M, Rebeiz JG, Rebeiz TJ, Batjer HH, Bendok BR. Relationship of growth to aneurysm rupture in asymptom-atic aneurysms ≤ 7 mm: a systematic analysis of the literature. Neurosurgery. 2011;68:1164–1171, discussion 1171. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31820edbd3.

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

Walderveen, Karel G. terBrugge, Ronit Agid and Gabriel J.E. RinkelK. Velthuis, Jacoba P. Greving, Ale Algra, Marieke J.H. Wermer, Marianne A.A. van

Daan Backes, Mervyn D.I. Vergouwen, Andreas T. Tiel Groenestege, A. Stijntje E. Bor, BirgittaPHASES Score for Prediction of Intracranial Aneurysm Growth

Print ISSN: 0039-2499. Online ISSN: 1524-4628 Copyright © 2015 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved.

is published by the American Heart Association, 7272 Greenville Avenue, Dallas, TX 75231Stroke doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008198

2015;46:1221-1226; originally published online March 10, 2015;Stroke. 

http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/46/5/1221World Wide Web at:

The online version of this article, along with updated information and services, is located on the

http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/suppl/2015/03/10/STROKEAHA.114.008198.DC1Data Supplement (unedited) at:

  http://stroke.ahajournals.org//subscriptions/

is online at: Stroke Information about subscribing to Subscriptions: 

http://www.lww.com/reprints Information about reprints can be found online at: Reprints:

  document. Permissions and Rights Question and Answer process is available in the

Request Permissions in the middle column of the Web page under Services. Further information about thisOnce the online version of the published article for which permission is being requested is located, click

can be obtained via RightsLink, a service of the Copyright Clearance Center, not the Editorial Office.Strokein Requests for permissions to reproduce figures, tables, or portions of articles originally publishedPermissions:

by guest on June 8, 2018http://stroke.ahajournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

iris

Abstract 31

未破裂脳動脈瘤治療後における治療前の機能への回復，職場復帰および生活満足度

Recovery to Preinterventional Functioning, Return-to-Work, and Life Satisfaction After Treatment of Unruptured Aneurysms

Daan Backes, MD 1 ; Gabriel J.E. Rinkel, MD, FRCPE 1 ; Irene C. van der Schaaf, MD, PhD 2 , et al . 1 Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, and 2 Department of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

背景および目的： 未破裂頭蓋内動脈瘤に対する予防的治療の最終目標は，生活満足度が高い状態での生存年数の増加である。動脈瘤治療後の機能低下の期間，労働能力，および生活満足度に関する理解は，予防的動脈瘤閉塞術を行うか否かを考えるうえで極めて重要である。 方法： 本研究では，2000 年～ 2013 年に未破裂動脈瘤の治療を受けた患者を対象として，治療前の機能状態に回復するまでの期間，職場復帰，および生活満足度に関する質問票を送付した。治療前，回復期，および追跡期間中の生活満足度の変化は，Wilcoxon 符号付き検定を用いて評価した。 結果： 質問票は 159 例に送付し，110 例（69%）から回答を得た。動脈瘤治療後の追跡期間の平均値は 6年［標準偏差（SD）4］であった。54 例は血管内治療，56 例は顕微鏡下閉塞術を受けていた。治療前の機能状態への完全回

復は患者の 81%［95%信頼区間（CI）：74 ～ 88］で報告され，回復までの期間の中央値は 3カ月（範囲 0 ～ 48 カ月）であった。職場への完全復帰は患者の 78%（95% CI：66 ～ 87）で報告された。生活満足度が高い患者の割合は，治療前の 76%（95% CI：67 ～ 84）から回復期の 52%（95% CI：43 ～ 61）に低下したが（ P ＜ 0.01），長期追跡期間中にほぼ復活した［67%（95% CI：59 ～ 76）， P ＝ 0.08］。 結論： 生活満足度は未破裂動脈瘤治療後の回復期において有意に低下した。長期的にみて，約 5例中 1例では完全回復が得られなかった。動脈瘤の予防的治療を検討する場合，このような治療の影響を考慮すべきである。前向き研究を行い，未破裂動脈瘤の治療を行った患者とくも膜下出血を発症した患者において，このような損失の差異を比較する必要がある。

Stroke 2015; 46: 1607-1612. DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.008795.

Abstract

P P

P P

0 10 20 30 40 50

0 10 20 30 40 50

0 10 20 30 40 50

60 70 80 90 100 110

P P

< 0.01 = 0.08

= 0.01 = 0.47

< 0.01 = 0.06

治療前

回復期

全患者（110例）

脳外科的治療（56例）

血管内治療（54例）

追跡期間中

治療前

回復期

追跡期間中

治療前

回復期

追跡期間中

非常に満足 満足 どちらかというと満足 どちらかというと不満 不満 非常に不満図2

治療群別の治療前，回復期，および追跡期間中における生活満足度。

main.indd 31main.indd 31 28-Sep-15 11:48:1128-Sep-15 11:48:11