Background: Unruptured small aneurysms with a size of <7 mm were often followed conservatively. However, it is unknown whether unruptured small multiple intracranial aneurysms (MIAs) are better to be prophylactically treated or conservatively followed.
Objective: We aim to compare the effectiveness of different strategies regarding their management.
Methods: A decision-analytic Markov model was built over a entire life cycle. The compared strategies include natural history, treat one aneurysm, treat both aneurysms, annual follow-up, biennial follow-up, and follow-up every 5 years. The inputs for the model were obtained from real-world data and related medical literature. Outcomes were measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).
Results: Treat both aneurysms had the highest effectiveness of 15.36 QALYs and treat one aneurysm had the second-highest effectiveness of 15.11 QALYs. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with 10,000 iterations showed that treat both aneurysms and treat one aneurysm were optimal in 67.28 and 17.91% of all cases, respectively. One-way and two-way sensitivity analyses showed that the result was sensitive to the proportion of moderate to severe disability after treating two aneurysms, mortality after treating two aneurysms, proportion of moderate to severe disability after treating one aneurysm, and rupture rate of small growing aneurysm. Either treat both aneurysms or treat one aneurysm would be the optimal strategy under most of the circumstances with the variations of these parameters.
Conclusion: For patients with small unruptured MIAs, prophylactic coiling was superior to conservative management and at least one aneurysm should be treated.
Keywords: comparative effectiveness analysis; endovascular therapy; multiple intracranial aneurysms; real-world data; small aneurysm.
Copyright © 2022 Chen, Tong, Feng, Peng, Niu, Han, Liu, Zhao, Wang, Pan and Liu.