GLP‐1 Receptor Agonists and Clinical Outcomes After Endovascular Treatment of Unruptured Aneurysms in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1RAs) are commonly prescribed for the management of type 2 diabetes, and recent studies have highlighted their neuroprotective and anti‐inflammatory properties. However, their influence on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing endovascular treatment for unruptured intracranial aneurysms remains largely unexplored. METHODS This retrospective cohort study utilized the TriNetX database to identify patients with type 2 diabetes ( International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision [ ICD‐10 ]: E11) and unruptured intracranial aneurysms ( ICD‐10 : I67.1). Patients were categorized based on the use of GLP‐1RAs. The outcomes included overall survival, poor functional outcome, new subarachnoid hemorrhage, and hydrocephalus. The propensity score matching method was applied. RESULTS A total of 6824 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 447 patients in each group following propensity score matching. No statistically significant differences were observed in short‐ and mid‐term mortality between GLP‐1RAs users and non‐users. However, long‐term mortality was significantly lower in the GLP‐1 group (odds ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.36–0.94). Furthermore, GLP‐1RAs users demonstrated significantly reduced risks of poor functional outcomes (odds ratio 0.37, 95% CI 0.21–0.66), new subarachnoid hemorrhage (odds ratio 0.39, 95% CI 0.27–0.56), and hydrocephalus (odds ratio 0.57, 95% CI 0.33–0.97) at 3 months, with similar trends persisting in mid‐ and long‐term follow‐up. CONCLUSION Use of GLP‐1RAs in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms treated via endovascular intervention is associated with improved long‐term survival and reduced risks of subarachnoid hemorrhage, hydrocephalus, and poor functional outcomes. These findings suggest a potential therapeutic benefit beyond glycemic control. Prospective studies are needed to validate these results and explore their implications for clinical decision‐making in aneurysm treatment.