Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
Reply

Reply:

J.J. Heit
American Journal of Neuroradiology April 2018, 39 (4) E53; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5584
J.J. Heit
aDepartment of Radiology, Interventional Neuroradiology Section Stanford University Medical Center Stanford, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for J.J. Heit
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

We thank Dr Mugikura and colleagues for their comments regarding our recent article “Patient Outcomes and Cerebral Infarction after Ruptured Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysm Treatment.”1 Patients who undergo ruptured anterior communicating (AcomA) aneurysm treatment by microsurgical clipping have been shown to have worse clinical outcomes compared with coil embolization,2 and these worse outcomes include reduced levels of functional independence and more severe neurocognitive outcomes. In our study, we found that ischemic infarction was more common after microsurgical clipping compared with coil embolization. Our observation that cerebral infarction in the recurrent artery of Heubner (RAH) territory was much more common in patients who underwent microsurgical clipping compared with coil embolization (33% versus 2%) does suggest an interesting mechanism by which surgical clipping might result in worse outcomes compared with coil embolization. We agree that the limitations of retrospective analyses result in much difficulty in discerning the exact causes of patient dependency after such a neurologically complicated event as rupture of a cerebral aneurysm.

In response to the first question raised by our colleagues, we did not detect any subcallosal artery infarctions in our study population, as they note in their letter. Patients in our study underwent posttreatment imaging evaluation by both CT and MR imaging, and the reduced sensitivity of CT to cerebral infarction, especially with subarachnoid and intraventricular hemorrhages, may limit the detection of subcallosal artery infarctions (including the fornix) in our study. This limitation is perhaps more pronounced because more patients who underwent surgical clipping had imaging follow-up by CT rather than MR imaging, and these were the patients more likely to have an RAH infarction and possibly a subcallosal artery infarction, as our colleagues argue. We agree that a more thorough discussion of these (and other) limitations could have been mentioned in our discussion. However, as any author of a retrospective study must do, we chose to list the most important limitations to our overall results; the lack of randomization, lack of blindness to treatment technique on follow-up imaging, and limited patient follow-up were deemed more important to emphasize to our readers.

We would like to further highlight the important methodologic and patient population differences between our colleagues' prior study3 and our study.1 The prior study of Mugikura et al3 that identified subcallosal infarctions was performed in patients who developed amnesia following ruptured or elective AcomA aneurysm clipping, and the imaging evaluation of these patients was performed several months after treatment using only MR imaging. By contrast, our study1 and another study4 included all patients who underwent ruptured AcomA treatment, patients treated by both clipping and coiling, and no specific posttreatment symptom (ie, amnesia) was required for subsequent analysis. We would argue that these differences in patient populations limit direct comparison between these studies when attempting to compare the frequency of infarctions related to the various perforating vessels that arise from the anterior communicating artery complex. We would also advise caution in directly applying the results from Mugikura et al to the population in our study, given these differences.

In response to the second point raised by our colleagues, reduced functional independence may be due to memory loss and amnesia, which is the focus of the prior study of Mugikura et al.3 However, there are many other causes of patient dependency after rupture of a cerebral aneurysm. As they note in their letter and we note in our limitations, we do not routinely perform neuropsychological testing after AcomA aneurysm rupture and treatment. We are therefore unable to comment on the specifics of memory loss, decision-making, and other executive function deficits. As we discussed in our article, striatum infarction has been linked to all these deficits,5⇓–7 whereas subcallosal artery infarction may be more specific for memory deficits.3 Thus, we would argue that RAH infarction may be an overall more important contributor to patient outcome in patients with ruptured AcomA aneurysms.

Last, we agree with our colleagues that a prospective study of patients with ruptured AcomA aneurysms is necessary to understand better the cause of worse neurologic outcomes after surgical treatment compared with coil embolization. Clearly, detailed MR imaging evaluation before and after treatment (at several time points) in concert with detailed neuropsychological evaluation would provide the best data to answer these questions.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Heit JJ,
    2. Ball RL,
    3. Telischak NA, et al
    . Patient outcomes and cerebral infarction after ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysm treatment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:2119–25 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5355 pmid:28882863
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Molyneux AJ,
    2. Kerr RSC,
    3. Yu LM, et al
    . 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 2005;366:809–17 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67214-5 pmid:16139655
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Mugikura S,
    2. Kikuchi H,
    3. Fujii T, et al
    . MR imaging of subcallosal artery infarct causing amnesia after surgery for anterior communicating artery aneurysm. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:2293–301 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4057 pmid:25082820
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Mortimer AM,
    2. Steinfort B,
    3. Faulder K, et al
    . Rates of local procedural-related structural injury following clipping or coiling of anterior communicating artery aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:256–64 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011620 pmid:25646130
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Mendez MF,
    2. Adams NL,
    3. Lewandowski KS
    . Neurobehavioral changes associated with caudate lesions. Neurology 1989;39:349–54 doi:10.1212/WNL.39.3.349 pmid:2927642
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Mizuta H,
    2. Motomura N
    . Memory dysfunction in caudate infarction caused by Heubner's recurring artery occlusion. Brain Cogn 2006;61:133–38 doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2005.11.002 pmid:16510225
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Martinaud O,
    2. Perin B,
    3. Gérardin E, et al
    . Anatomy of executive deficit following ruptured anterior communicating artery aneurysm. Eur J Neurol 2009;16:595–601 doi:10.1111/j.1468-1331.2009.02546.x pmid:19236465
    CrossRefPubMed
  • © 2018 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 39 (4)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 39, Issue 4
1 Apr 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reply:
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Reply:
J.J. Heit
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2018, 39 (4) E53; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5584

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Reply:
J.J. Heit
American Journal of Neuroradiology Apr 2018, 39 (4) E53; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5584
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Relationship between Ischemic Injury and Patient Outcomes after Surgical or Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysms
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2022 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2023 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire