Differences in Morphologic and Hemodynamic Characteristics for “PHASES-Based” Intracranial Aneurysm Locations

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Vlak MH,
   3. Algra A,
   4. Brandenburg R, et al

   . Prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, with emphasis on sex, age, comorbidity, country, and time period: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol 2011;10:626–36 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(11)70109-0 pmid:21641282

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Wiebers DO

   . Unruptured intracranial aneurysms: natural history, clinical outcome, and risks of surgical and endovascular treatment. Lancet 2003;362:103–10 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13860-3 pmid:12867109

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   2. Johnston SC,
   3. Higashida RT,
   4. Barrow DL, et al

   . Recommendations for the endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Committee on Cerebrovascular Imaging of the American Heart Association Council on Cardiovascular Radiology. Stroke 2002;33:2536–44 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000034708.66191.7D pmid:12364750

   FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   2. Greving JP,
   3. Wermer MJ,
   4. Brown RD Jr., et al

   . Development of the PHASES score for prediction of risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms: a pooled analysis of six prospective cohort studies. Lancet Neurol 2014;13:59–66 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70263-1 pmid:24290159

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Xiang J,
   3. Natarajan SK,
   4. Tremmel M, et al

   . Hemodynamic-morphologic discriminants for intracranial aneurysm rupture. Stroke 2011;42:144–52 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.592923 pmid:21106956

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   2. Xiang J,
   3. Yu J,
   4. Choi H, et al

   . Rupture Resemblance Score (RRS): toward risk stratification of unruptured intracranial aneurysms using hemodynamic-morphological discriminants. J Neurointerv Surg 2015;7:490–95 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011218 pmid:24811740

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Xiang J,
   3. Yu J,
   4. Snyder KV, et al

   . Hemodynamic-morphological discriminant models for intracranial aneurysm rupture remain stable with increasing sample size. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:104–10 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011477 pmid:25488922

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Antiga L,
   3. Piccinelli M,
   4. Botti L, et al

   . An image-based modeling framework for patient-specific computational hemodynamics. Med Biol Eng Comput 2008;46:1097–112 doi:10.1007/s11517-008-0420-1 pmid:19002516

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   2. Raghavan ML,
   3. Ma B,
   4. Harbaugh RE

   . Quantified aneurysm shape and rupture risk. J Neurosurg 2005;102:355–62 doi:10.3171/jns.2005.102.2.0355 pmid:15739566

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Dhar S,
    3. Tremmel M,
    4. Mocco J, et al

    . Morphology parameters for intracranial aneurysm rupture risk assessment. Neurosurgery 2008;63:185–96; discussion 196–97 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000316847.64140.81 pmid:18797347

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    2. Oka S,
    3. Nakai M

    . Optimality principle in vascular bifurcation. Biorheology 1987;24:737–51 pmid:3502768

    PubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Takao H,
    3. Murayama Y,
    4. Otsuka S, et al

    . Hemodynamic differences between unruptured and ruptured intracranial aneurysms during observation. Stroke 2012;43:1436–39 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.640995 pmid:22363053

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
13. 13.↵
    2. Backes D,
    3. Vergouwen MD,
    4. Tiel Groenestege AT, et al

    . PHASES score for prediction of intracranial aneurysm growth. Stroke 2015;46:1221–26 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008198 pmid:25757900

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    2. Meng H,
    3. Tutino VM,
    4. Xiang J, et al

    . High WSS or low WSS? Complex interactions of hemodynamics with intracranial aneurysm initiation, growth, and rupture: toward a unifying hypothesis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1254–62 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3558 pmid:23598838

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Xiang J,
    3. Tutino VM,
    4. Snyder KV, et al

    . CFD: computational fluid dynamics or confounding factor dissemination? The role of hemodynamics in intracranial aneurysm rupture risk assessment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1849–57 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3710 pmid:24029393

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    2. Kashiwazaki D,
    3. Kuroda S

    . Size ratio can highly predict rupture risk in intracranial small (<5 mm) aneurysms. Stroke 2013;44:2169–73 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.001138 pmid:23743979

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. Ma D,
    3. Tremmel M,
    4. Paluch RA, et al

    . Size ratio for clinical assessment of intracranial aneurysm rupture risk. Neurol Res 2010;32:482–86 doi:10.1179/016164109X12581096796558 pmid:20092677

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Lin N,
    3. Ho A,
    4. Gross BA, et al

    . Differences in simple morphological variables in ruptured and unruptured middle cerebral artery aneurysms. J Neurosurg 2012;117:913–19 doi:10.3171/2012.7.JNS111766 pmid:22957531

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    2. Ma B,
    3. Harbaugh RE,
    4. Raghavan ML

    . Three-dimensional geometrical characterization of cerebral aneurysms. Ann Biomed Eng 2004;32:264–73 pmid:15008374

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    2. Rahman M,
    3. Smietana J,
    4. Hauck E, et al

    . Size ratio correlates with intracranial aneurysm rupture status: a prospective study. Stroke 2010;41:916–20 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.574244 pmid:20378866

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Tremmel M,
    3. Dhar S,
    4. Levy EI, et al

    . Influence of intracranial aneurysm-to-parent vessel size ratio on hemodynamics and implication for rupture: results from a virtual experimental study. Neurosurgery 2009;64:622–30; discussion 630–31 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000341529.11231.69 pmid:19349824

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    2. Miura Y,
    3. Ishida F,
    4. Umeda Y, et al

    . Low wall shear stress is independently associated with the rupture status of middle cerebral artery aneurysms. Stroke 2013;44:519–21 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.675306 pmid:23223503

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    2. Chien A,
    3. Castro MA,
    4. Tateshima S, et al

    . Quantitative hemodynamic analysis of brain aneurysms at different locations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:1507–12 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1600 pmid:19406766

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    2. Meng H,
    3. Wang Z,
    4. Hoi Y, et al

    . Complex hemodynamics at the apex of an arterial bifurcation induces vascular remodeling resembling cerebral aneurysm initiation. Stroke 2007;38:1924–31 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.106.481234 pmid:17495215

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
25. 25.↵
    2. Boussel L,
    3. Rayz V,
    4. McCulloch C, et al

    . Aneurysm growth occurs at region of low wall shear stress: patient-specific correlation of hemodynamics and growth in a longitudinal study. Stroke 2008;39:2997–3002 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.521617 pmid:18688012

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. Dolan JM,
    3. Kolega J,
    4. Meng H

    . High wall shear stress and spatial gradients in vascular pathology: a review. Ann Biomed Eng 2013;41:1411–27 doi:10.1007/s10439-012-0695-0 pmid:23229281

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Doddasomayajula R,
    3. Chung B,
    4. Hamzei-Sichani F, et al

    . Differences in hemodynamics and rupture rate of aneurysms at the bifurcation of the basilar and internal carotid arteries. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2017;38:570–76 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5088 pmid:28209576

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    2. Frösen J

    . Smooth muscle cells and the formation, degeneration, and rupture of saccular intracranial aneurysm wall–a review of current pathophysiological knowledge. Transl Stroke Res 2014;5:347–56 doi:10.1007/s12975-014-0340-3 pmid:24683005

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    2. Lindgren AE,
    3. Koivisto T,
    4. Björkman J, et al

    . Irregular shape of intracranial aneurysm indicates rupture risk irrespective of size in a population-based cohort. Stroke 2016;47:1219–26 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.012404 pmid:27073241

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Weir B,
    3. Amidei C,
    4. Kongable G, et al

    . The aspect ratio (dome/neck) of ruptured and unruptured aneurysms. J Neurosurg 2003;99:447–51 doi:10.3171/jns.2003.99.3.0447 pmid:12959428

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    2. Backes D,
    3. Vergouwen MD,
    4. Velthuis BK, et al

    . Difference in aneurysm characteristics between ruptured and unruptured aneurysms in patients with multiple intracranial aneurysms. Stroke 2014;45:1299–303 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.004421 pmid:24652309

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    2. Qian Y,
    3. Takao H,
    4. Umezu M, et al

    . Risk analysis of unruptured aneurysms using computational fluid dynamics technology: preliminary results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1948–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2655 pmid:21903914

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
33. 33.↵
    2. Schneiders JJ,
    3. Marquering HA,
    4. van Ooij P, et al

    . Additional value of intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics in discriminating ruptured versus unruptured intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1920–26 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4397 pmid:26206812

    Abstract/FREE Full Text