Cerebral vascular tortuosity and aneurysm formation and rupture: a novel vessel tortuosity scale
Rattachement africain : us, fr, pa. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
ABSTRACT Cerebral aneurysm (CA) rupture is the most common cause of nontraumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Recent data suggests that tortuosity is associated with aneurysm formation and rupture risk. We aimed to determine if tortuosity correlates with CA development and rupture in a mouse CA model and to develop a novel tortuosity scale to be used for in vivo CA studies. A highly validated, elastase-mouse CA model was used to assess cerebral vessel tortuosity with CA formation and rupture in sham and elastase groups. A 4-point ordinal scale was created to evaluate predictive capacity for vessel tortuosity level and CA formation and rupture. Nearly all sham animals (92%) had little to no vessel tortuosity on the visual scale (median, IQR: 1, [1-2]), compared to 24% in the elastase groups (2, [2-3]) (p=0.001). Sham cohorts had zero animals with highly tortuous vessels, while 3.5mU and 35mU cohorts had >35% of animals with significant visual tortuosity, p=0.003 and p<0.000, respectively. CA formation and rupture was higher in the elastase groups compared to the sham group (p=0.002). Both the visual scale and tortuosity index significantly predicted CA formation (p<0.001) and rupture (p<0.001). A novel tortuosity scale is highly predictive of CA formation and rupture in vivo . It may offer a new measurement to better understand vessel stress in the pathogenesis and progression of CAs.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Cerebral vascular tortuosity and aneurysm formation and rupture: a novel vessel tortuosity scale
- Date Crossref
- 25/06/2025
- Éditeur
- openRxiv
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.