Comparison between stenting and conservative management of posterior circulation perforator aneurysms: Systematic review and case series

Purpose Posterior circulation perforator aneurysms (PCPAs) are a rare type of intracranial aneurysms whose natural history and optimal clinical management are still largely unexplored. This study aims to report our experience with treating ruptured PCPAs and to provide a systematic review of the literature to compare the two most established treatment options, endovascular stenting, and conservative management including administration of antifibrinolytic drugs and watchful waiting. Methods We performed a systematic review of the literature following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Major databases were searched for case reports and case report series written in the English language between 1995 and 2020. Additionally, we retrospectively reviewed our stroke center database for cases of ruptured PCPAs between January 2014 and July 2020. Endovascular stenting and conservative treatment were compared using endpoints, including favorable outcome rate (mRS 0-2), occlusion rate, mortality rate, periinterventional complication rate, and re-hemorrhage rate. Results We identified 31 patients treated endovascularly using stents and 33 patients treated conservatively, with the administration of antifibrinolytic drugs in 3 of them. Our analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the groups, except for the occlusion rate. Conclusions The optimal management strategy of PCPAs is still unknown, but stenting can be considered as an effective occlusion method with an acceptable complication rate. Preventive ventricular drainage may be necessary due to the high hydrocephalus rate encountered in ruptured PCPAs.