Figure 3.

A) Explorative analysis on which parameter to choose for further evaluation shows that height is significantly correlating with all the other measured parameters. This means that height is positively correlating with higher PHASES scores, length, width etc., except height to width ratio. Further analysis between contrast enhancing and nonenhancing aneurysms will be based on these two parameters (height, height to width ratio), which stay in relatio9n to all other parameters. Should we proceed to test every parameter for every group separately the Bonferoni correction for significant p value would rise too high and our parameters would not reach any significance based on the number of studied aneurysms which would be too low. Therefore we proceeded on analysing height, which stays in correlation with the other parameters, or height to width ratio, which stays in not in relation with height. hwr: height to width ratio; br: bottleneck ratio; ar: aspect ratio. B) As shown in this diagram there are significant differences between contrast enhancing behaviour and aneurysm localization. Based on this observation it became obvious why there was no difference between the groups (Figure 4) when all aneurysms were analysed irrespective of their localization. The results of this diagram dictated to analyse the contrast and non-contrast groups separately for each localization.