@article{DenglerMaldanerGlaeskeretal.2016,
  author    = {Dengler, Julius and Maldaner, Nicolai and Gl{\"a}sker, Sven and Endres, Matthias and Wagner, Martin and Malzahn, Uwe and Heuschmann, Peter U. and Vajkoczy, Peter},
  title     = {Outcome of Surgical or Endovascular Treatment of Giant Intracranial Aneurysms, with Emphasis on Age, Aneurysm Location, and Unruptured Aneuryms - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis},
  series = {Cerebrovascular Diseases},
  volume    = {41},
  journal   = {Cerebrovascular Diseases},
  number    = {3-4},
  organization    = {Giant Intracranial Aneurysm Study Group},
  issn      = {1015-9770},
  doi       = {10.1159/000443485},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-196792},
  pages     = {187-198},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background: Designing treatment strategies for unruptured giant intracranial aneurysms (GIA) is difficult as evidence of large clinical trials is lacking. We examined the outcome following surgical or endovascular GIA treatment focusing on patient age, GIA location and unruptured GIA. Methods: Medline and Embase were searched for studies reporting on GIA treatment outcome published after January 2000. We calculated the proportion of good outcome (PGO) for all included GIA and for unruptured GIA by meta-analysis using a random effects model. Results: We included 54 studies containing 64 study populations with 1,269 GIA at a median follow-up time (FU-T) of 26.4 months (95\% CI 10.8-42.0). PGO was 80.9\% (77.4-84.4) in the analysis of all GIA compared to 81.2\% (75.3-86.1) in the separate analysis of unruptured GIA. For each year added to patient age, PGO decreased by 0.8\%, both for all GIA and unruptured GIA. For all GIA, surgical treatment resulted in a PGO of 80.3\% (95\% CI 76.0-84.6) compared to 84.2\% (78.5-89.8, p = 0.27) after endovascular treatment. In unruptured GIA, PGO was 79.7\% (95\% CI 71.5-87.8) after surgical treatment and 84.9\% (79.1-90.7, p = 0.54) after endovascular treatment. PGO was lower in high quality studies and in studies presenting aggregate instead of individual patient data. In unruptured GIA, the OR for good treatment outcome was 5.2 (95\% CI 2.0-13.0) at the internal carotid artery compared to 0.1 (0.1-0.3, p < 0.1) in the posterior circulation. Patient sex, FU-T and prevalence of ruptured GIA were not associated with PGO. Conclusions: We found that the chances of good outcome after surgical or endovascular GIA treatment mainly depend on patient age and aneurysm location rather than on the type of treatment conducted. Our analysis may inform future research on GIA.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GrebeMalzahnDonhauseretal.2020,
  author    = {Grebe, S{\"o}ren Jendrik and Malzahn, Uwe and Donhauser, Julian and Liu, Dan and Wanner, Christoph and Krane, Vera and Hammer, Fabian},
  title     = {Quantification of left ventricular mass by echocardiography compared to cardiac magnet resonance imaging in hemodialysis patients},
  series = {Cardiovascular Ultrasound},
  volume    = {18},
  journal   = {Cardiovascular Ultrasound},
  doi       = {10.1186/s12947-020-00217-y},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-229282},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Background: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH), defined by the left ventricular mass index (LVMI), is highly prevalent in hemodialysis patients and a strong independent predictor of cardiovascular events. Compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), echocardiography tends to overestimate the LVMI. Here, we evaluate the diagnostic performance of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared to CMR regarding the assessment of LVMI in hemodialysis patients. Methods: TTR and CMR data for 95 hemodialysis patients who participated in the MiREnDa trial were analyzed. The LVMI was calculated by two-dimensional (2D) TTE-guided M-mode measurements employing the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) and Teichholz (Th) formulas, which were compared to the reference method, CMR. Results: LVH was present in 44\% of patients based on LVMI measured by CMR. LVMI measured by echocardiography correlated moderately with CMR, ASE: r = 0.44 (0.34-0.62); Th: r = 0.44 (0.32-0.62). Compared to CMR, both echocardiographic formulas overestimated LVMI (mean increment LVMI (ASE-CMR): 19.5 +/- 19.48 g/m(2),p < 0.001; mean increment LVMI (Th-CMR): 15.9 +/- 15.89 g/m(2),p < 0.001). We found greater LVMI overestimation in patients with LVH using the ASE formula compared to the Th formula. Stratification of patients into CMR LVMI quartiles showed a continuous decrease in increment LVMI with increasing CMR LVMI quartiles for the Th formula (p < 0.001) but not for the ASE formula (p = 0.772). Bland-Altman analysis showed that the Th formula had a constant bias independent of LVMI. Both methods had good discrimination ability for the detection of LVH (ROC-AUC: 0.819 (0.737-0.901) and 0.808 (0.723-0.892) for Th and ASE, respectively). Conclusions: The ASE and Th formulas overestimate LVMI in hemodialysis patients. However, the overestimation is less with the Th formula, particularly with increasing LVMI. The results suggest that the Th formula should be preferred for measurement of LVMI in chronic hemodialysis patients.},
  language  = {en}
}