Discussion
The current study quantified for the first time, A1 asymmetry and the likelihood of occurrences of AcomAC aneurysms. Previously the co-occurrence of AcomAC aneurysms with A1 asymmetry has been observed but not quantified.11 25 26 The study included random CCTA cases accessing the data at a specialised tertiary centre. Obviously, we would assume to see cases of suspected cerebral pathologies in a specialised tertiary medical centre. We examined fairly a large number of 166 CTA evaluating individual A1 asymmetry and aneurysms. The findings (OR and risk percentage) on A1 asymmetry ratio (≥1.42) were extremely significant in relation to the AcomAC aneurysms.
The findings of the study indicate that, the prevalence of aneurysms in AcomAC was greater with increasing asymmetry between left and right A1s (table 2 and online supplemental file 3). The asymmetry ratio of 1.5 indicates that the cross-sectional area of an A1 segment is twice as large as that of the other one (1.52=2.25). Furthermore, such asymmetry would likely to have significant haemodynamic effects that could produce 80% risk of AcomAC aneurysms (table 2, online supplemental file 3 and online supplemental file 4). The exact mechanism involved in causing aneurysms in AcomAC is not well understood.27 The development of aneurysm could be due to the altered haemodynamics resulting from the increased blood flow and the greater peak systolic pressure in the larger ACA.12 27 28 Imbalanced haemodynamics originating from the larger ACA may weaken and dilate the wall of the AcomAC at branching points, resulting in an aneurysmal formation.12 21 29 Thus, the extent of the asymmetry in A1s may allow to predict the occurrence of the AcomAC aneurysms. Current sample included patients presenting with various cerebral problems, including strokes and aneurysms. However, when patients were divided into two subsamples: those with a history and without known history of aneurysms, the results did not differ significantly between these sub samples (table 2 and online supplemental file 3). This lack of difference indicates that prior history of aneurysms did not influence the overall results of the study. Therefore, the observed correlation between asymmetry of A1s and AcomAC aneurysms is independent of the prior history of any cerebral aneurysms, because in the current sample there is no correlation between presence of AcomAC aneurysms and aneurysms elsewhere ((table 2 and online supplemental file 3).
The A1 asymmetry ratio was just below 1.5 in 11 out of 31 AcomAC aneurysms cases. However, 3 out of those 11 cases had A1 asymmetry ratios of more than 1.42 (indicating double the cross-sectional area of one A1 artery compared with the other). Furthermore, all others (ie, 8 out of those 11 cases with asymmetry ratio below 1.5) had asymmetry ratios above the median of 1.09 and represented the ‘mild to moderate asymmetry’ category. Seven of those 11 cases had also aneurysms elsewhere (tables 2 and 3 and online supplemental file 3). These may indicate that causes for the development of AcomAC aneurysms in the lower A1 asymmetry (<1.40) cases may be because of the quality of vessel’s walls and high blood pressure, in addition to altered haemodynamics resulting from the asymmetry.
Since the CCTA data were taken from the specialised medical centre, it is true that we get to see symptomatic individuals with different pathologies. That approach is even better to see the connection between A1 asymmetry and the presence or absent of aneurysms rather than trying to scan many innocent people in the community, exposing them to the radiation unnecessarily. Modifiable known risk factors, such as history of smoking and hypertension were not quantified in this study. These could have been supplementary factors promoting AcomAC aneurysms, however, literature suggests hypertension is not related to the cerebral aneurysms.30 Furthermore, there is no reason to assume that A1 asymmetry is related to the smoking and hypertension. This research found a coincidence of A1 asymmetry and AcomAC aneurysms. This coincidence could result from: (A) AcomAC aneurysm altering the blood flow and remodelling the size of A1 segments, (B) Asymmetry of A1 arteries causing altered blood flow in AcomAC and affecting the walls and producing the aneurysm. Remodelling of the size of arteries in the vicinity or proximal to an aneurysm is not known, therefore, it is more likely that A1 asymmetry causes aneurysms. A longitudinal prospective study would likely confirm vessel asymmetry as the cause of aneurysms rather than the reverse. We are not aware of such a study being conducted and there may be significant ethical impediments. Treatment and the management of patients after strokes are costly to the affected family as well as to the country. A multinational study has shown that, the cost of management of a patient after a stroke ranged from US$18 538–US$228 038.31 The procedure of treatment of unruptured aneurysms is safe, and the risk of development of stroke is approximately 3% and the mortality is less than 1%, therefore, there is great advantage in identifying and treating aneurysms before they rupture.32 33
The ability to predict the likelihood of the development of aneurysms in AcomAC using the asymmetry ratio between right and left A1s could enhance the viability of a national screening programme.
Undertaking CCTA screening in the general population is not recommended due to ethical reason. However, if A1 asymmetry is noticed in cranial investigation done for other reasons, clinicians should be cautious as it could indicate the possibility of future development of aneurysms. Therefore, MRI screening of older individuals may be beneficial, and has been recommended.20 These findings make significant contribution to existing knowledge, since the A1 asymmetry index has been categorised in ascending order and matched with the presence or absence of AcomAC aneurysms in each of the 166 cases. This type of study has not been done before. General anatomical variations of A1 could be corrected with the advancement of medical and surgical technologies. This would prevent unequal blood flow and pressure contributing to the occurrences of AcomAC aneurysms. Patients who have A1 asymmetry (especially the A1 asymmetry with ≥1.42) on scans should be monitored regularly by follow up imaging and angiograms. Reconstruction of A1 asymmetry is a future possibility with technological advancement.