Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23868159›Full record

Trial reportAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2014

Differences in the angiographic evaluation of coiled cerebral aneurysms between a core laboratory reader and operators: results of the Cerecyte Coil Trial.

I Rezek, R K Lingineni, M Sneade, A J Molyneux, A J Fox, D F Kallmes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Safety and efficacy of the fourth-generation Acandis Acclino flex plus stent for the treatment of complex intracranial aneurysms.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Endovascular coiling for cerebral aneurysm: single-center experience in Egypt.The Egyptian journal of neurology, psychiatry and neurosurgery · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

I RezekDepartments of Radiology.
R K Lingineni
M Sneade
A J Molyneux
A J Fox
D F Kallmes
University of Oxford · GBMayo Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIndependent evaluation of angiographic images is becoming widely applied in the assessment of treatment outcomes of cerebral aneurysms. In the current study, we assessed the agreement between an independent core laboratory and the operators regarding angiographic appearance in a recent randomized, controlled trial. MATERIALS AND

methodsData were derived from the Cerecyte Coil Trial. Angiographic images of each coiled aneurysm, taken immediately after embolization and at 5- to 7-month follow-up, were evaluated by the operator at the treating center and by an independent neuroradiologist at the core laboratory. For the purpose of this study, images were interpreted on a 3-point scale to provide uniformity for analysis; grade 1: complete occlusion, grade 2: neck remnant; and grade 3: sac filling. "Unfavorable angiographic appearance" was defined as grade 3 at follow-up or interval worsening of grade between the 2 time points.

resultsThe study included 434 aneurysms. Immediately after embolization, grade 3 was reported by operators in 39 (9%) compared with 52 (12%) by the core laboratory (P = .159). On follow-up, grade 3 was reported by operators in 44 (10%) compared with 81 (19%) by the core laboratory (P < .0001). Overall, operators noted unfavorable angiographic appearance in 78 (18%) compared with 134 (31%) by the core laboratory (P < .0001). At every time point, agreement between the core laboratory and the operators was slight.

conclusionsUnfavorable angiographic appearance was noted almost twice as frequently by an independent core laboratory as compared with the operators. Planning of trials and interpretation of published studies should be done with careful attention to the mode of angiographic appearance interpretation.

Indexed as

Cerebral AngiographyEmbolization, TherapeuticHumansIntracranial AneurysmMedical Staff, HospitalObserver VariationProfessional CompetenceRadiography, InterventionalReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

PMID23868159
PMCPMC7966467
OpenAlexW2147232057

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.