Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25187768›Full record

ReviewInterventional neurology2013

Early endovascular treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Jordi A Matias-Guiu, Carmen Serna-Candel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Interventional neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Jordi A Matias-GuiuDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Carmen Serna-CandelDepartment of Neurology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Subarachnoid hemorrhage is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Rebleeding is one of its major complications, which occurs mainly within the first 24 h and worsens the clinical outcome in a very dramatic way. It may be prevented by aneurysm treatment: surgical clipping or endovascular coiling. We review the evidence of and recent advances in endovascular treatment and timing of the intervention. Data supporting the benefit of early (<72 h) and ultra-early (<24 h) treatment is based on observational studies. An earlier approach may be relevant for the prevention of rebleeding and improvement of clinical outcome, but several disadvantages should be considered, such as an increased rate of periprocedural complications. Hence, a well-designed randomized controlled trial deems necessary to be able to define the optimal time of treatment. The possibility of treatment concomitant with the initial angiography should also be taken into account in this trial. This fact might represent a benefit favoring coiling over clipping in the prevention of rebleeding, and thus avoiding the inevitable delay necessary for the preparation for surgery.

Indexed as

Early treatmentEndovascular coilingEndovascular treatmentSubarachnoid hemorrhageTiming

Identifiers

PMID25187768
PMCPMC4031770

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.