Validation of the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score: comparison with real-world cerebrovascular practice

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to compare the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score (UIATS) recommendations with the real-world experience in a quaternary academic medical center with a high volume of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs). METHODS All patients with UIAs evaluated during a 3-year period were included. All factors included in the UIATS were abstracted, and patients were scored using the UIATS. Patients were categorized in a contingency table assessing UIATS recommendation versus real-world treatment decision. The authors calculated the percentage of misclassification, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS A total of 221 consecutive patients with UIAs met the inclusion criteria: 69 (31%) patients underwent treatment and 152 (69%) did not. Fifty-nine (27%) patients had a UIATS between -2 and 2, which does not offer a treatment recommendation, leaving 162 (73%) patients with a UIATS treatment recommendation. The UIATS was significantly associated with treatment (p < 0.001); however, the sensitivity, specificity, and percentage of misclassification were 49%, 80%, and 28%, respectively. Notably, 51% of patients for whom treatment would be recommended by the UIATS did not undergo treatment in the real-world cohort and 20% of patients for whom conservative management would be recommended by UIATS had intervention. The area under the ROC curve was 0.646. CONCLUSIONS Compared with the authors' experience, the UIATS recommended overtreatment of UIAs. Although the UIATS could be used as a screening tool, individualized treatment recommendations based on consultation with a cerebrovascular specialist are necessary. Further validation with longitudinal data on rupture rates of UIAs is needed before widespread use.

Confidence of treatment decision and perceived risk of procedure-related neurological complications in the management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms

“…In accordance with previous studies, our findings confirm the overall suboptimal interrater reliability regarding optimal management of UIAs 7. We evaluated numerous patient and rater variables to analyze possible reasons behind the wide variation among raters.…”

“…To guide management and decision making in patients with UIAs, the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score (UIATS) was developed by 69 multidisciplinary specialists 6. However, this scoring system has not been broadly adopted and a recent study comparing the UIATS' recommendations with the real-world cerebrovascular practice showed several differences 7. Medical decision making plays an important role in neurovascular interventions, and studies analyzing this multifactorial and complex process are limited.…”

Is the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score (UIATS) sensitive enough to detect aneurysms at risk of rupture?

“…In October 2017, Ravindra et al [22] published a singlecenter validation study for the UIATS. Here, the authors scored 221 patients with UIA according to the UIATS.…”

Use of our protocol of multimodality tools to aid in the safe microsurgical clipping of unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms

“…[1516] Neither scoring system has been satisfactorily validated on an independent large cohort and there is a conflicting reports about such scoring systems leading to over treatment and questions about their reliability on stable UIAs, growing UIAs. [1718]…”