Propensity score-adjusted analysis on stent-assisted coiling versus coiling alone for ruptured intracranial aneurysms

Abstract Stent-assisted coiling (SAC) for ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs) remains controversial due to an inherent risk of potential thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications. We compared SAC and coiling alone for the management of RIAs using propensity score-adjustment. Sixty-four patients treated by SAC and 220 by stand-alone coiling were retrospectively reviewed and compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity scores. Functional outcome, procedure-related and overall complications and angiographic results were analyzed. Aneurysms treated by SAC had a larger diameter, a wider neck and were more frequently located at the posterior circulation. SAC had a higher risk for thromboembolic complications (17.2% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.025), however, this difference did not persist in the IPTW analysis (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.7–2.3, adjusted p = 0.458). In the adjusted analysis, rates of procedural cerebral infarction (p = 0.188), ventriculostomy-related hemorrhage (p = 0.584), in-hospital mortality (p = 0.786) and 6-month favorable functional outcome (p = 0.471) were not significantly different between the two groups. SAC yielded a higher complete occlusion (80.0% vs. 67.2%, OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.9–5.4, p < 0.001) and a lower recanalization rate (17.5% vs. 26.1%, OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2–0.6, p < 0.001) than stand-alone coiling at 6-month follow-up. In conclusion, SAC of large and wide-necked RIAs provided higher aneurysm occlusion and similar clinical outcome, when compared to stand-alone coiling