Despite advances in neurosurgical techniques and technology, the management of ruptured giant fusiform MCA aneurysms remains challenging. In the literature, microsurgical intervention is the most commonly described approach. However, recent advancements in endovascular techniques have expanded therapeutic options and as a result there is no consensus on the optimal management of these aneurysms.

A literature search was performed through the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases, for surgical and endovascular management of ruptured giant fusiform MCA aneurysms. Inclusion criteria included: fusiform morphology, hemorrhage, major diameter greater than 2.5 cm and located along the MCA.

Literature review yielded 21 studies published from 1981 to 2023 and a total of 32 patients ages 33.40 ± 18.28. The male to female ratio was 1.9:1. The average Hunt and Hess score upon presentation in the total population was 2.78 ± 1.48, and the average pre-operative mRS of the total population was 2.75 ± 1.83. The average major diameter was 3.80 ± 1.85 cm. Average follow-up was 8.9 ± 9.74 months. There was no statistical difference in age (p = 0.5609), pre-operative mRS (p = 0.2355), Hunt and Hess scale (p = 0.183), aneurysm major diameter (p = 0.594) or follow-up (0.8922) between the two modalities. There was no significant difference in clinical outcome between microsurgical and endovascular intervention, nor was there a significant difference when stratified according to sex, major diameter, or location along the MCA. Two case examples are presented after management with cerebral revascularization.

Our analysis underscores the absence of statistical differences in clinical outcomes between microsurgical and endovascular strategies for ruptured giant fusiform MCA aneurysms, which highlights the need for complex surgical revascularization as represented on the illustrative cases where no endovascular option was available