Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,512

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Prevalence and Risk of Rupture of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review

Rinkel, Gabriel J. E., Djibuti, Mamuka, Algra, Ale, van Gijn, J.·1998·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose —The estimates on the prevalence and the risk of rupture of intracranial saccular aneurysms vary widely between studies. We conducted a systematic review on prevalence and risk of rupture of intracranial aneurysms and classified the data according to study design, study population, and aneurysm characteristics. Methods —We searched for studies published between 1955 and 1996 by means of a MEDLINE search and a cumulative review of the reference lists of all relevant publications. Two authors independently assessed eligibility of all studies and extracted data on study design and on numbers and characteristics of patients and aneurysms. Results —For data on prevalence we found 23 studies, totalling 56 304 patients; 6685 (12%) of these patients were from 15 angiography studies. Prevalence was 0.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.4% to 0.5%) in retrospective autopsy studies, 3.6% (3.1 to 4.1) for prospective autopsy studies, 3.7% (3.0 to 4.4) in retrospective angiography studies, and 6.0% (5.3 to 6.8) in prospective angiography studies. For adults without specific risk factors, the prevalence was 2.3% (1.7 to 3.1); it tended to increase with age. The prevalence was higher in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (relative risk [RR], 4.4 [2.7 to 7.2]), a familial predisposition (RR, 4.0 [2.7 to 6.0]), or atherosclerosis (RR, 2.3 [1.7 to 3.1]). Only 8% (5 to 11) of the aneurysms were >10 mm. For the risk of rupture, we found nine studies, totalling 3907 patient-years. The overall risk per year was 1.9% (1.5 to 2.4); for aneurysms =10 mm, the annual risk was 0.7% (0.5 to 1.0). The risk was higher in women (RR, 2.1[1.1 to 3.9]) and for aneurysms that were symptomatic (RR, 8.3 [4.0 to 17]), >10 mm (RR, 5.5 [3.3 to 9.4]), or in the posterior circulation (RR, 4.1 [1.5 to 11]). Conclusions —Data on prevalence and risk of rupture vary considerably according to study design, study population, and aneurysm characteristics. If all available evidence with inherent overestimation and underestimation is taken together, for adults without risk factors for subarachnoid hemorrhage, aneurysms are found in approximately 2%. The vast majority of these aneurysms are small (=10 mm) and have an annual risk of rupture of approximately 0.7%.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.str.29.1.251

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 1,512

Metadata

Authors
Rinkel, G. J. E., Djibuti, M., Algra, A., & van Gijn, J.
Venue
Stroke
Published
1998-01
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
251-256
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2057045896
Cited by
1,512
References
0
FWCI
15.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence and Risk of Rupture of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.29.1.251
The paper
Rinkel, G. J. E., Djibuti, M., Algra, A., & van Gijn, J. (1998). Prevalence and Risk of Rupture of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review. Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.29.1.251

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.