Background The long-term cognitive and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes after treatment of ruptured anterior communicating artery (ACoA) aneurysms are unknown. Methods Potential participants were all consecutive patients with ruptured ACoA aneurysms who were treated at one institution from July 1992 to December 2008. All potential participants were asked to complete the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), Center for Epidemiology Studies-Depression (CES-D) questionnaire, Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, and Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status-Modified (TICS-M). Patient charts were retrospectively reviewed for baseline demographics and clinical status, intra-operative details, and post-operative course. Reporting of cognitive and QoL assessment results was stratified by treatment method (endovascular coil embolization and surgical clipping by pterional craniotomy or orbitocranial craniotomy). Results In total, 82 patients (18 treated with coiling, 27 by orbitocranial craniotomy, and 37 by pterional craniotomy) were included in this study. In total, 32 patients (9 treated by coiling, 11 by orbitocranial craniotomy, and 16 by pterional craniotomy) completed follow-up cognitive and QoL questionnaires. The mean follow-up for patients who completed the questionnaires was 8.64±3.81 years. The three groups did not differ in questionnaires assessing cognitive status (TICS-M p=0.114, CFQ p=0.111). Moreover, there were no observed differences in QoL or depression scores between the three groups. Conclusions At long-term follow-up, QoL, cognitive, and depression test scores of patients with ruptured ACoA aneurysms are similar across open surgery and coiling modalities. Our results emphasize the importance of considering long-term outcomes with validated daily measures of functioning when reporting on outcomes after treatment for ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Larger prospective studies are required to further explore the results.

Background Recent studies have strongly indicated the benefits of endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke, but what remains a continued debate is the role for general anaesthesia versus conscious sedation (CS) for such procedures. Retrospective studies have found poorer neurological outcomes in patients who underwent general anesthesia (GA); however, some have revealed worse baseline stroke severity in these patients.Methods This study is a retrospective cohort study aimed at comparing mortality and morbidity of GA versus CS in patients treated with endovascular intervention in acute ischemic stroke. Chi-square and t-test analyses were used. Results Patients in the GA (n=42) group were more likely to be deceased than those in the CS (n=67) group at hospital discharge, 3 months, and 6 months poststroke onset. Morbidity, as defined by modified Rankin Score, was significantly greater in the GA group at hospital discharge, and a similar trend was seen in morbidity at 3 months postdischarge. Conclusion General anesthesia for endovascular intervention in acute ischemic stroke was associated with increased mortality and poorer neurological incomes compared with conscious sedation. In our study, age, gender, history of hypertension, history of diabetes, and baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale were not significantly different between the groups. Although the need for a randomized, prospective study on this topic is clear, our study represents further corroboration of the safety and efficacy of conscious sedation in these procedures.