The Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial: 6-year results

Author:

Spetzler Robert F.1,McDougall Cameron G.1,Zabramski Joseph M.1,Albuquerque Felipe C.1,Hills Nancy K.23,Russin Jonathan J.1,Partovi Shahram4,Nakaji Peter1,Wallace Robert C.4

Affiliation:

1. Divisions of Neurological Surgery, and

2. Departments of Neurology and

3. Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, California

4. Neuroradiology, Barrow Neurological Institute, St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona; and

Abstract

OBJECT The authors report the 6-year results of the Barrow Ruptured Aneurysm Trial (BRAT). This ongoing randomized trial, with the final goal of a 10-year follow-up, compares the safety and efficacy of surgical clip occlusion and endovascular coil embolization in patients presenting with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) from a ruptured aneurysm. The 1- and 3-year results of this trial have been previously reported. METHODS In total, 500 patients with an SAH met the entry criteria and were enrolled in the study. Of these patients, 471 were randomly assigned to the treatments: 238 to surgical clipping and 233 to endovascular coiling. Six patients who died before treatment and 57 patients with nonaneurysmal SAHs were excluded, leaving a total of 408 patients who underwent clipping (209 assigned) or coiling (199 assigned). Whether to treat patients within the assigned group or to cross over patients to the other group was at the discretion of the treating physician; 38% (75/199) of the patients assigned to coiling were crossed over to clipping and 1.9% (4/209) assigned to clipping were crossed over to coiling. The outcome data were collected by a dedicated nurse practitioner. The primary outcome analysis was based on the assigned treatment group; poor outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score > 2 and was independently adjudicated. Six years after randomization, 336 (82%) of 408 patients who had been treated were available for examination. RESULTS On the basis of an mRS score of > 2, and similar to the results at the 3-year follow-up, no significant difference in outcomes (p = 0.24) was detected between the 2 treatment groups. Complete aneurysm obliteration at 6 years was achieved in 96% (111/116) of the clipping group and in 48% (23/48) of the coiling group (p < 0.0001). In the period between the 3- and 6-year follow-ups, 3 additional patients assigned to coiling and none assigned to clipping received retreatment, for overall retreatment rates of 4.6% (13/280) for clipping and 16.4% (21/128) for coiling (p < 0.0001). When aneurysm location was considered, the 6-year results continued to match the previously reported results, with no difference in outcome for anterior circulation aneurysms at most time points. Of the anterior circulation aneurysms assigned to coiling treatment, 42% (70/168) were crossed over to clipping treatment. The outcomes for posterior circulation aneurysms continued to favor coiling. The randomization process was unexpectedly skewed, with 18 of 21 treated aneurysms of the posterior inferior cerebellar artery (PICA) being assigned to clipping, but even when PICA aneurysms were removed from the analysis, outcomes for the posterior circulation aneurysms still favored coiling. CONCLUSIONS Although BRAT was statistically underpowered to detect small differences, these results suggest little difference in outcome between the 2 treatments for anterior circulation aneurysms. This was not the case for the posterior circulation aneurysms, where coil embolization appeared to provide a sustained advantage over clipping. Aneurysm obliteration rates in BRAT were significantly lower and retreatment rates significantly higher in the patients undergoing coiling than in those undergoing clipping. However, despite the fact that retreatment rates were higher after coiling, no recurrent hemorrhages were known to have occurred in patients undergoing coiling in BRAT who were followed up for 6 years. Sufficient questions remain about the relative benefits of the 2 treatment modalities to warrant further well-designed randomized trials.

Publisher

Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG)

Subject

Genetics,Animal Science and Zoology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3