Open Access
CC BY 4.0 · Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2025; 83(06): s00451809545
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1809545
Review Article

Statin versus no statin after treatment with pipeline embolization device for intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis

Authors

  • Nathalia Soares Barbosa

    1   Escola Superior de Ciências da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória, Vitória ES, Brazil.
  • Felipe Araujo Gouhie

    2   Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia MG, Brazil.
  • Bezalel Hakkeem

    3   Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute, Thrissur Kerala, India.
  • Amanda Machado

    4   Universidade Estadual Paulista, Botucatu SP, Brazil.
  • João Paulo Mota Telles

    5   Universidade de São Paulo, Departamento de Neurologia, São Paulo SP, Brazil.
  • Luís Gustavo Biondi Soares

    6   Hospital Estadual Central, Departamento de Neurocirurgia, Vitória ES, Brazil.
  • Leandro de Assis Barbosa

    6   Hospital Estadual Central, Departamento de Neurocirurgia, Vitória ES, Brazil.
Preview

Abstract

Background

Some studies demonstrated the role of statin therapy in improving outcomes after coil embolization or surgical clipping of cerebral aneurysm. However, the benefit of statins after pipeline embolization device (PED) for intracranial aneurysms is not well established.

Objective

To evaluate the effects of statins on hemorrhagic and ischemic complications as well as on complete occlusion of aneurysm in the treatment with PED.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for articles published from their inception to November 2024. Data were collected from observational studies comparing statin to no statin therapy following pipeline embolization.

Results

Four studies were included, comprising 2,822 patients and 3,063 aneurysms, 127 of which were ruptured and 4 of which received adjunctive coil embolization. Total hemorrhagic complication was reduced in the statin group (risk ratio [RR] = 0.50; 95%CI: 0.29–0.85; p = 0.010; I2 = 0%) but did not reveal difference in restricted propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis (RR= 0.50; 95%CI: 0.24–1.07 p = 0.073; I2 = 27%). There was no difference between the groups in complete occlusion of aneurysm rate at the last follow-up (RR = 0.94; 95%CI: 0.88–1.00; p = 0.055; I2 = 8.0%) or total ischemic complications (RR = 1.48; 95%CI: 1.06–2.07; p = 0.021; I2 = 0%).

Conclusion

Statin use significantly reduced hemorrhagic complications after PED; however, this result should be interpreted cautiously due to study limitations. No significant differences were noted in complete occlusion rates or ischemic complications between the groups.

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization: LGS; Data curation: NB, BH, AM; Formal analysis: LGS, NB, FG, LB; Validation: NB, FG; Visualization: FG, NB, BH; Writing - original draft: NB, BH, AM; Writing - review & editing: NB, LGS, JPMT, LB; Investigation: NB, FG; Project administration: LGS.


Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of the present study are available from the corresponding author, LGS, upon reasonable request.


Editor-in-Chief: Ayrton Roberto Massaro 0000-0002-0487-5299.


Associate Editor: Antonio Arauz Góngora 0000-0002-3340-4138.




Publication History

Received: 21 December 2024

Accepted: 03 March 2025

Article published online:
21 June 2025

© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua Rego Freitas, 175, loja 1, República, São Paulo, SP, CEP 01220-010, Brazil

Bibliographical Record
Nathalia Soares Barbosa, Felipe Araujo Gouhie, Bezalel Hakkeem, Amanda Machado, João Paulo Mota Telles, Luís Gustavo Biondi Soares, Leandro de Assis Barbosa. Statin versus no statin after treatment with pipeline embolization device for intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2025; 83: s00451809545.
DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1809545