ArticleClinical neuroradiology2015
Benefit of second catheter angiography in patients with nontraumatic subarachnoidal hemorrhage.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine the yield of repetitive catheter angiography (digital subtraction angiography (DSA)) for the detection of causative vascular lesions in patients with nontraumatic subarachnoidal hemorrhage (SAH) and negative initial DSA. We hypothesize that a second DSA might be helpful to detect an initially occult bleeding source.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 649 patients with acute SAH and invasive catheter angiographies between 2004 and 2012. In 90 SAH patients initial imaging was negative concerning a causative bleeding source. A total of 113 repetitive DSA were performed. Two neuroradiologists reanalyzed the initial imaging and the result of the reangiography independently.
resultsIn 4/90 patients (4.5 %) bleeding source was first detected in the second or third DSA. In all other patients, no causative vascular lesion was found. Reasons for the initially false negative diagnostics were one dissecting aneurysm and thrombosis of three aneurysms within the acute phase of SAH.
conclusionsRepetitive DSA revealed the cause of SAH in 4.5 % of the cases. These findings have a therapeutic and prognostic impact. We think that at least a second DSA should be part of diagnostic work-up in patients with SAH and missing bleeding source, even considering the risk of an additional invasive angiography itself.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24287969What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.