Decision-making and neurosurgeons’ agreement in the management of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage based on computed tomography angiography

  • Nicolai Maldaner
  • Jan-Karl Burkhardt
  • Martin Nikolaus Stienen
  • Johannes Goldberg
  • David Bervini
  • Philippe Bijlenga
  • Davide Croci
  • Daniel Zumofen
  • Donato D’Alonzo
  • Serge Marbacher
  • Rodolfo Maduri
  • Roy Thomas Daniel
  • Carlo Serra
  • Giuseppe Esposito
  • Marian C. Neidert
  • Oliver Bozinov
  • Luca Regli
Original Article - Vascular

Abstract

Background

To determine the neurosurgeon’s agreement in aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (aSAH) management with special emphasis on the rater’s level of experience. A secondary aim was to analyse potential aneurysm variables associated with the therapeutic recommendation.

Method

Basic clinical information and admission computed tomography angiography (CTA) images of 30 consecutive aSAH patients were provided. Twelve neurosurgeons independently evaluated aneurysm characteristics and gave recommendations regarding the emergency management and aneurysm occlusion therapy. Inter-rater variability and predictors of treatment recommendation were evaluated.

Results

There was an overall moderate agreement in treatment decision [κ = 0.43; 95% confidence interval ((CI), 0.387–0.474] with moderate agreement for surgical (κ = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.386–0.479) and endovascular treatment recommendation (κ = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.398–0.49). Agreement on detailed treatment recommendations including clip, coil, bypass, stent, flow diverter and ventriculostomy was low to moderate. Inter-rater agreement did not significantly differ between residents and consultants. Middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysm location was a positive predictor of surgical treatment [odds ratio (OR), 49.57; 95% CI, 10.416–235.865; p < 0.001], while patients aged >65 years (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.03–0.0434; p = 0.001), fusiform aneurysm type (OR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.044–0.747; p = 0.018) and intracerebral haematoma (ICA) aneurysm location (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.088–0.643; p = 0.005) were associated with a recommendation for endovascular treatment.

Conclusions

Agreement on aSAH management varies considerably across neurosurgeons, while therapeutic decision-making is challenging on an individual patient level. However, patients aged >65 years, fusiform aneurysm shape and ICA location were associated with endovascular treatment recommendation, while MCA aneurysm location remains a surgical domain in the opinion of neurosurgeons without formal endovascular training.

Keywords

Subarachnoid haemorrhage Inter-rater reliability Inter-rater agreement Neurovascular imaging Aneurysm morphology CT angiography 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organisation or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

For this type of study formal consent is not required.

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Barker FG, Amin-Hanjani S, Butler WE, Hoh BL, Rabinov JD, Pryor JC, Ogilvy CS, Carter BS (2004) Age-dependent differences in short-term outcome after surgical or endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in the United States, 1996-2000. Neurosurgery 54(1):18–28 discussion 28-30CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Connolly ES, Hoh BL, Selden NR, Asher AL, Kondziolka D, Boulis NM, Barker FG (2010) Clipping versus coiling for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: integrated medical learning at CNS 2007. Neurosurgery 66(1):19–33CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Darsaut TE, Gentric J-C, McDougall CM, Gevry G, Roy D, Weill A, Raymond J (2015) Uncertainty and agreement regarding the role of flow diversion in the management of difficult aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 36(5):930–936CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Darsaut TE, Kotowski M, Raymond J (2012) How to choose clipping versus coiling in treating intracranial aneurysms. Neurochirurgie 58(2–3):61–67CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Denis DJ (2014) Crossover and clinical outcomes in the barrow ruptured aneurysm trial. J Neurosurg 120(2):571–572CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fang C, Li M-H, Zhang P-L, Wang W, Tan H-Q, Xu H-W, Zhou B (2009) Endovascular treatment for very small supraclinoid aneurysms with stent-assisted coiling. Long-term follow-up in six cases. Interv Neuroradiol 15(1):37–44CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gigante P, Hwang BY, Appelboom G, Kellner CP, Kellner MA, Connolly ES (2010) External ventricular drainage following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. Br J Neurosurg 24(6):625–632CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hernesniemi J, Koivisto T (2004) Comments on “The impact of the international subarachnoid aneurysm treatment trial (ISAT) on neurosurgical practice”. Acta Neurochir 146(2):203–208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koivisto T, Vanninen R, Hurskainen H, Saari T, Hernesniemi J, Vapalahti M (2000) Outcomes of early endovascular versus surgical treatment of ruptured cerebral aneurysms. A prospective randomized study. Stroke 31(10):2369–2377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maldaner N, Stienen MN, Bijlenga P et al (2017) Interrater agreement in the radiologic characterization of ruptured intracranial aneurysms based on computed tomography angiography. World Neurosurg 103:876–882 e1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    McDougall CG, Spetzler RF, Zabramski JM, Partovi S, Hills NK, Nakaji P, Albuquerque FC (2012) The barrow ruptured aneurysm trial. J Neurosurg 116(1):135–144CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Molyneux AJ, Birks J, Clarke A, Sneade M, Kerr RSC (2015) The durability of endovascular coiling versus neurosurgical clipping of ruptured cerebral aneurysms: 18 year follow-up of the UK cohort of the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT). Lancet 385(9969):691–697CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Molyneux AJ, Kerr RS, Yu LM, Clarke M, Sneade M, Yarnold JA, Sandercock P (2005) International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised comparison of effects on survival, dependency, seizures, rebleeding, subgroups, and aneurysm occlusion. Lancet 366(9488):809–817CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moon K, Levitt MR, Almefty RO, Nakaji P, Albuquerque FC, Zabramski JM, McDougall CG, Spetzler RF (2015) Treatment of ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysms: equipoise in the endovascular era? Neurosurgery 77(4):566–571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murayama Y, Nien YL, Duckwiler G, Gobin YP, Jahan R, Frazee J, Martin N, Viñuela F (2003) Guglielmi detachable coil embolization of cerebral aneurysms: 11 years’ experience. J Neurosurg 98(5):959–966CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Regli L, Dehdashti AR, Uske A, de Tribolet N (2002) Endovascular coiling compared with surgical clipping for the treatment of unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms: an update. Acta Neurochir Suppl 82:41–46PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Regli L, Uske A, de Tribolet N (1999) Endovascular coil placement compared with surgical clipping for the treatment of unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms: a consecutive series. J Neurosurg 90(6):1025–1030CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rodríguez-Hernández A, Sughrue ME, Akhavan S, Habdank-Kolaczkowski J, Lawton MT (2013) Current management of middle cerebral artery aneurysms: surgical results with a “clip first” policy. Neurosurgery 72(3):415–427CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ryttlefors M, Enblad P, Kerr RSC, Molyneux AJ (2008) International subarachnoid aneurysm trial of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling: subgroup analysis of 278 elderly patients. Stroke 39(10):2720–2726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schatlo B, Fung C, Fathi A-RR et al (2012) Introducing a nationwide registry: the Swiss study on aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (Swiss SOS). Acta Neurochir 154(12):2173–2178 discussion 2178CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spetzler RF, McDougall CG, Zabramski JM, Albuquerque FC, Hills NK, Russin JJ, Partovi S, Nakaji P, Wallace RC (2015) The barrow ruptured aneurysm trial: 6-year results. J Neurosurg 123(3):609–617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Steklacova A, Bradac O, Charvat F, De Lacy P, Benes V (2016) “Clip first” policy in management of intracranial MCA aneurysms: single-centre experience with a systematic review of literature. Acta Neurochir 158(3):533–546CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tang C, Zhang T-S, Zhou L-F (2014) Risk factors for rebleeding of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 9(6):e99536CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tanweer O, Wilson TA, Kalhorn SP, Golfinos JG, Huang PP, Kondziolka D (2015) Neurosurgical decision making: personal and professional preferences. J Neurosurg 122(3):678–691CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van Dijk JMC, Groen RJM, Ter Laan M, Jeltema JR, Mooij JJA, Metzemaekers JDM (2011) Surgical clipping as the preferred treatment for aneurysms of the middle cerebral artery. Acta Neurochir 153(11):2111–2117CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wostrack M, Mielke D, Kato N, Guhl S, Schmidt NO, Maldaner N, Vajkoczy P, Dengler J, Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Study Group (2015) Interobserver variability in the characterization of giant intracranial aneurysms with special emphasis on aneurysm diameter and shape. Acta Neurochir 157(11):1859–1865CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zweifel-Zehnder AE, Stienen MN, Chicherio C et al (2015) Call for uniform neuropsychological assessment after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: Swiss recommendations. Acta Neurochir 157(9):1449–1458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicolai Maldaner
    • 1
  • Jan-Karl Burkhardt
    • 1
  • Martin Nikolaus Stienen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Johannes Goldberg
    • 3
  • David Bervini
    • 3
  • Philippe Bijlenga
    • 2
  • Davide Croci
    • 4
    • 5
  • Daniel Zumofen
    • 4
    • 5
  • Donato D’Alonzo
    • 6
  • Serge Marbacher
    • 6
  • Rodolfo Maduri
    • 7
  • Roy Thomas Daniel
    • 7
  • Carlo Serra
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Esposito
    • 1
  • Marian C. Neidert
    • 1
  • Oliver Bozinov
    • 1
  • Luca Regli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity Hospital Zurich, University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity Clinic GenevaGenevaSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity Hospital BernBernSwitzerland
  4. 4.Department of NeurosurgeryBasel University HospitalBaselSwitzerland
  5. 5.Section for Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Department of RadiologyBasel University HospitalBaselSwitzerland
  6. 6.Department of NeurosurgeryKantonsspital AarauAarauSwitzerland
  7. 7.Department of NeurosurgeryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations