Table 3 Univariable and multivariable logistic regression for the presence of a basilar tip aneurysm (N = 313).

From: Surrounding vascular geometry associated with basilar tip aneurysm formation

Variables

Univariable

Multivariable

N = 313

Multivariablea

N = 139

Multivariableb

N = 313

OR (95% CI)

P-val

OR (95% CI)

P-val

OR (95% CI)

P-val

OR (95% CI)

P-val

Age

1.02 (1.00–1.05)

0.02

Female

0.78 (0.44–1.38)

0.39

Alcohol use (current)

0.85 (0.53–1.36)

0.49

Tobacco use (current)

1.01 (0.62–1.64)

0.96

Hypertension

1.28 (0.80–2.05)

0.30

Family history of SAH

0.76 (0.43–1.33)

0.34

Family history of aneurysms

1.06 (0.49–2.26)

0.89

Ruptured aneurysm

0.94 (0.59–1.52)

0.81

Hypoplastic PCoA

     Unilateral vs. no

1.63 (0.87–3.06)

0.13

     Bilateral vs. no

1.51 (0.79–2.88)

0.21

Aplastic PCoA

     Unilateral vs. no

9.26 (1.14–1201)

0.03

    

     Bilateral vs. no

4.90 (0.52–652)

0.19

    

Fetal PCoA

     Unilateral vs. no

0.77 (0.30–1.94)

0.57

     Bilateral vs. no

2.55 (0.29–22.2)

0.40

Vertebral dominance

0.77 (0.44–1.33)

0.35

Daughter diameter ratio (larger/smaller)

0.56 (0.23–1.35)

0.20

Parent artery (basilar artery) diameter in mm

0.49 (0.29–0.83)

 < 0.01

0.18 (0.06–0.46)

 < 0.01

0.17 (0.03–0.73)

0.02

0.52 (0.29–0.93)

0.03

Diameter size ratio (Parent/(D1 + D2))

4.36 × 10−4 (3.06 × 10−5–0.005)

 < 0.01

0.001 (2.76 × 10−5–0.05)

 < 0.01

6.80 × 10−6 (2.65 × 10−10–0.04)

0.01

4.27 × 10−4 (2.87 × 10−5–0.005)

< 0.01

Daughter–daughter angle in degrees

1.11 (1.08–1.13)

 < 0.01

1.11 (1.08–1.14)

 < 0.01

1.10 (1.06–1.15)

< 0.01

Parent–daughter angle ratio

24.94 (5.86–106.1)

 < 0.01

  1. aSubgroup analysis with small basilar tip aneurysms only (width ≤ 3 mm).
  2. bSensitivity analysis without angles.
  3. D1 = diameter of daughter vessel 1, D2 = diameter of daughter vessel 2, PCoA = posterior communicating artery, SAH = subarachnoid hemorrhage.