Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment

Tony T. Lee, Michael Baytion, Robert Sciacca, J. P. Mohr, John Pile-Spellman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

42 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Publication bias and/or true heterogeneity can skew aggregate impressions from scientific literature. To better determine aggregate measures for unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment, we analyzed adverse outcome rates of surgical clipping and endovascular coil embolization. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies publishing adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping between January 1990 and July 2003. Studies were classified as single-center, multicenter, or community-based. We defined adverse outcome rates as combined all-cause early or in-hospital morbidity and mortality. We determined cumulative adverse outcome rates by plotting precision measure (sample size) against trial-specific effect (adverse outcome rate). FINDINGS: We included 4 endovascular coiling multicenter/community-based studies (1019 patients) and 13 single-center studies (810 patients) and 5 surgical clipping multicenter/ community-based studies (10,541 patients) and 23 single-center studies (1759 patients). Cumulative adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping were 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6%-10.1%) and 17.8% (95% CI 17.2%-18.6%). INTERPRETATION: Scattergram distribution illustrated the magnitude of bias in current literature reporting UIAs. Major parts of the literature may have underestimated surgical clipping morbidity and mortality, which can be attributed to bias from smaller retrospective studies. Neuroradiologic coiling studies were less likely to include factors contributing to inaccurate adverse outcome rates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1902-1908
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology
Volume26
Issue number8
StatePublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Intracranial Aneurysm
Confidence Intervals
Morbidity
Literature
Publication Bias
Therapeutics
Hospital Mortality
MEDLINE
Sample Size
Retrospective Studies
Mortality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Lee, T. T., Baytion, M., Sciacca, R., Mohr, J. P., & Pile-Spellman, J. (2005). Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment. American Journal of Neuroradiology, 26(8), 1902-1908.

Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment. / Lee, Tony T.; Baytion, Michael; Sciacca, Robert; Mohr, J. P.; Pile-Spellman, John.

In: American Journal of Neuroradiology, Vol. 26, No. 8, 2005, p. 1902-1908.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lee, TT, Baytion, M, Sciacca, R, Mohr, JP & Pile-Spellman, J 2005, 'Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment', American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 1902-1908.
Lee, Tony T. ; Baytion, Michael ; Sciacca, Robert ; Mohr, J. P. ; Pile-Spellman, John. / Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment. In: American Journal of Neuroradiology. 2005 ; Vol. 26, No. 8. pp. 1902-1908.
@article{b9308c4dedd2416985b46cb6459e26c0,
title = "Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Publication bias and/or true heterogeneity can skew aggregate impressions from scientific literature. To better determine aggregate measures for unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment, we analyzed adverse outcome rates of surgical clipping and endovascular coil embolization. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies publishing adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping between January 1990 and July 2003. Studies were classified as single-center, multicenter, or community-based. We defined adverse outcome rates as combined all-cause early or in-hospital morbidity and mortality. We determined cumulative adverse outcome rates by plotting precision measure (sample size) against trial-specific effect (adverse outcome rate). FINDINGS: We included 4 endovascular coiling multicenter/community-based studies (1019 patients) and 13 single-center studies (810 patients) and 5 surgical clipping multicenter/ community-based studies (10,541 patients) and 23 single-center studies (1759 patients). Cumulative adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping were 8.8{\%} (95{\%} confidence interval [CI] 7.6{\%}-10.1{\%}) and 17.8{\%} (95{\%} CI 17.2{\%}-18.6{\%}). INTERPRETATION: Scattergram distribution illustrated the magnitude of bias in current literature reporting UIAs. Major parts of the literature may have underestimated surgical clipping morbidity and mortality, which can be attributed to bias from smaller retrospective studies. Neuroradiologic coiling studies were less likely to include factors contributing to inaccurate adverse outcome rates.",
author = "Lee, {Tony T.} and Michael Baytion and Robert Sciacca and Mohr, {J. P.} and John Pile-Spellman",
year = "2005",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "1902--1908",
journal = "American Journal of Neuroradiology",
issn = "0195-6108",
publisher = "American Society of Neuroradiology",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Aggregate analysis of the literature for unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment

AU - Lee, Tony T.

AU - Baytion, Michael

AU - Sciacca, Robert

AU - Mohr, J. P.

AU - Pile-Spellman, John

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - BACKGROUND: Publication bias and/or true heterogeneity can skew aggregate impressions from scientific literature. To better determine aggregate measures for unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment, we analyzed adverse outcome rates of surgical clipping and endovascular coil embolization. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies publishing adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping between January 1990 and July 2003. Studies were classified as single-center, multicenter, or community-based. We defined adverse outcome rates as combined all-cause early or in-hospital morbidity and mortality. We determined cumulative adverse outcome rates by plotting precision measure (sample size) against trial-specific effect (adverse outcome rate). FINDINGS: We included 4 endovascular coiling multicenter/community-based studies (1019 patients) and 13 single-center studies (810 patients) and 5 surgical clipping multicenter/ community-based studies (10,541 patients) and 23 single-center studies (1759 patients). Cumulative adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping were 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6%-10.1%) and 17.8% (95% CI 17.2%-18.6%). INTERPRETATION: Scattergram distribution illustrated the magnitude of bias in current literature reporting UIAs. Major parts of the literature may have underestimated surgical clipping morbidity and mortality, which can be attributed to bias from smaller retrospective studies. Neuroradiologic coiling studies were less likely to include factors contributing to inaccurate adverse outcome rates.

AB - BACKGROUND: Publication bias and/or true heterogeneity can skew aggregate impressions from scientific literature. To better determine aggregate measures for unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment, we analyzed adverse outcome rates of surgical clipping and endovascular coil embolization. METHODS: Two independent reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies publishing adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping between January 1990 and July 2003. Studies were classified as single-center, multicenter, or community-based. We defined adverse outcome rates as combined all-cause early or in-hospital morbidity and mortality. We determined cumulative adverse outcome rates by plotting precision measure (sample size) against trial-specific effect (adverse outcome rate). FINDINGS: We included 4 endovascular coiling multicenter/community-based studies (1019 patients) and 13 single-center studies (810 patients) and 5 surgical clipping multicenter/ community-based studies (10,541 patients) and 23 single-center studies (1759 patients). Cumulative adverse outcome rates for endovascular coiling and surgical clipping were 8.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.6%-10.1%) and 17.8% (95% CI 17.2%-18.6%). INTERPRETATION: Scattergram distribution illustrated the magnitude of bias in current literature reporting UIAs. Major parts of the literature may have underestimated surgical clipping morbidity and mortality, which can be attributed to bias from smaller retrospective studies. Neuroradiologic coiling studies were less likely to include factors contributing to inaccurate adverse outcome rates.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32944460428&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32944460428&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 26

SP - 1902

EP - 1908

JO - American Journal of Neuroradiology

JF - American Journal of Neuroradiology

SN - 0195-6108

IS - 8

ER -