ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2015
Comparison between Solitaire™ AB and Enterprise stent-assisted coiling for intracranial aneurysms.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03387995 (Safety and Efficacy of Stent Deployment for Intracranial Aneurysms), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Safety and Efficacy of Stent Deployment for Intracranial Aneurysms: Trials of Clinical Curative Effect, Follow-up Study and Hemodynamics
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated Machine Learning Model Development for Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment Outcome Prediction: A Feasibility Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Stent-assisted coiling of cerebral aneurysms with the Neuroform Atlas stent.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2018Article
- Outcomes of Stent-assisted Coil Embolization of Wide-necked Intracranial Aneurysms Using the Solitaire™ AB Neurovascular Remodeling Device.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2015Article
- Comparative Outcome Analysis of Enterprise and Neuroform Stent-Assisted Coiling of Cerebral Aneurysms: A Review of the Literature.Asian journal of neurosurgeryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to analyze the feasibility, rate of procedure-related complications and midterm angiographic follow-up outcomes using the Enterprise (EP) and Solitaire™ AB (ST) stents in the stent-assisted coiling of intracranial aneurysms. In total, 81 patients with 90 aneurysms were included in the study, with the aim to treat 43 aneurysms with the EP stent (47.8%) and 47 aneurysms with the ST stent (52.2%). The 90 aneurysms were successfully stented and subsequently coiled; however, in four patients undergoing treatment with the EP stent, the stent was not navigable; thus, treatment with the ST stent was employed (EP, n=39, 43.3%; ST, n=51, 56.7%). Of the 90 aneurysms, 44 cases were ruptured aneurysms, with 74 located in the anterior circulation and 16 located in the posterior circulation. The stenting success rate of the ST stent was significantly higher compared with the EP stent. However, no statistically significant differences were observed with regard to the packing density, complete occlusion, progressive occlusion, recurrence rate, procedure-related complications, in-stent stenosis and stent migration rates between the two groups. In conclusion, the two common medical devices used for intracranial aneurysms are relatively safe and effective for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. However, due to the higher stenting success rate of the ST stent, this medical devise was demonstrated to be more flexible and feasible compared with the EP stent.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.