• G S Baltsavias, J V Byrne, J Halsey, S C Coley, M J Sohn, and A J Molyneux.
• Department of Radiology, Radcliffe Infirmary National Health Service Trust, Oxford, England.
• Neurosurgery. 2000 Dec 1;47(6):1320-9; discussion 1329-31.

ObjectiveTo elucidate the effect of treatment timing on procedural clinical outcomes after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) for patients treated by endosaccular coil embolization.MethodsA group of 327 patients who were consecutively treated, during a 46-month period, for ruptured intracranial aneurysms by coil embolization within 30 days after SAH were evaluated. Outcomes were assessed by comparing immediate pretreatment World Federation of Neurological Surgeons (WFNS) grades, 72-hour posttreatment WFNS grades, and modified Glasgow Outcome Scale scores at 6 months for patients treated within 48 hours (Group 1), 3 to 10 days (Group 2), or 11 to 30 days (Group 3) after SAH.ResultsThe three interval-to-treatment groups included 33, 38, and 29% of the patients, respectively. Before treatment, 70% of the patients in Group 1, 78% of those in Group 2, and 83% of those in Group 3 were in good clinical grades (i.e., WFNS Grade 1 or 2). After coil embolization, the WFNS grades were either unchanged or improved for 93.5% of the patients in Group 1, 89.5% of those in Group 2, and 91.5% of those in Group 3. After 6 months, 81.3% of the patients in Group 1 experienced good outcomes (modified Glasgow Outcome Scale scores of 1 or 2), as did 84% of those in Group 2 and 80% of those in Group 3. No statistical difference was demonstrated between the three groups when they were compared for these two variables.ConclusionThe interval between endovascular treatment and SAH did not affect periprocedural morbidity rates or 6-month outcomes. Coil embolization should therefore be performed as early as possible after aneurysmal SAH, to prevent aneurysmal rerupture.

33 keywords...

hide…