Evidence Hub

Morphometry of cerebral arterial bifurcations harbouring aneurysms: a case-control study

K. Ćmiel-Smorzyk, E. Kawlewska, W. Wolański, A. Hebda, P. Ładziński, W. Kaspera

BMC Neurology, 2022

147 participants · 9 citations

Abstract

Background Conclusions from studies evaluating vessel dimensions and their deviations from values resulting from the principle of minimum work (PMW) on the formation of intracranial aneurysms (IAs) are still inconclusive. Our study aimed to perform a morphometric analysis of cerebral arterial bifurcations harbouring aneurysms. Methods The study comprised 147 patients with basilar artery (BA) and middle cerebral artery (MCA) aneurysms and 106 patients constituting the control group. The following morphometric parameters were evaluated: the radii of vessels forming the bifurcation, the junction exponent, the values of the bifurcation angles (Φ 1 and Φ 2 angles between the parent vessel trunk axis and the larger or smaller branches, respectively; α angle, the total bifurcation angle) and the difference between the predicted optimal and observed branch angles. Results The analysed parameters for internal carotid artery (ICA) bifurcations were not significantly different among the groups. The MCA and BA bifurcation angles and the radii of the parent MCA and BA vessels with aneurysms were significantly higher than those of the control group. The differences between the predicted optimal and observed branch angles were significantly higher for BA and MCA bifurcations with aneurysms compared to the control group. The mean junction exponent for bifurcations in the circle of Willis (i.e., ICA and BA bifurcations, respectively) and MCA bifurcations with aneurysms was significantly…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 147 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free