Meta-Analysis of Pterional Versus Supraorbital Keyhole Approach for Clipping Intracranial Aneurysms: Direct Comparison of Approach-Related Complications.

BACKGROUND

The supraorbital keyhole approach (SKA) and pterional approach (PA) have been recommended for clipping intracranial aneurysms (IAs). We conducted a meta-analysis to systematically and comprehensively compare the clinical outcomes between the 2 approaches.

METHODS

We retrieved potential academic studies that had compared the clinical outcomes of SKA and PA for clipping IAs from the Cochrane Library, Medline, PubMed, and EMBASE databases. The references of the identified studies were carefully reviewed to ensure that all available documents had been included in the present study. The meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the acknowledged PRISMA (prioritized reported items for systematic review and meta-analysis) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 8 studies with 1016 participants were included in our study. Of these 1016 patients with IAs, 518 were assigned to the SKA group and 498 to the PA group. Our results showed that the SKA is preferable for clipping IAs compared with the PA because of its shorter operative time (weighted mean difference, -3.163; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.577 to -0.749; P = 0.01) and length of stay, especially for the patients with unruptured IAs (weighted mean difference, -52.107; 95% CI, -81.597 to -22.618). However, a lower risk of postoperative infection was found in the SKA group (4.6% vs. 8.5%; odds ratio, 0.398; 95% CI, 0.186-0.850; P = 0.017), which seemed to derive from the ruptured IAs (OR, 0.330; 95% CI, 0.136-0.800; P = 0.014). However, no significant difference was found in the incidence of frontal sinus opening, completed occlusion, procedural complications, intraoperative rupture, postoperative hematoma, or cerebral vessel spasm.

CONCLUSIONS

The SKA was associated with a shorter length of stay and operation time and a lower risk of postoperative infection. Hence, the SKA seems to be equally effective and safe for clipping IAs compared with PA and should be recommended for surgeons who have acquired sufficient experience with this technique owing to its advantages compared with the PA.