Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27153192›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Large Residual Volume, Not Low Packing Density, Is the Most Influential Risk Factor for Recanalization after Coil Embolization of Cerebral Aneurysms.

Akiyo Sadato, Motoharu Hayakawa, Kazuhide Adachi, Ichiro Nakahara, Yuichi Hirose

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Packing density and the angiographic results of coil embolization of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Experimental Study of Coil Compaction: Impact of Pulsatile Stress.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Akiyo SadatoDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fujita Health University, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Motoharu HayakawaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fujita Health University, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Kazuhide AdachiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fujita Health University, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Ichiro NakaharaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fujita Health University, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Yuichi HiroseDepartment of Neurosurgery, Fujita Health University, Toyoake City, Aichi, Japan.
Fujita Health University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTight coil packing with density of at least 20%-25% is known to be important for preventing recanalization after embolization of cerebral aneurysms. However, large aneurysms sometimes recanalize regardless of the packing density, suggesting that the absolute residual volume which is determined by aneurysm volume and packing density may be more important risk factor for recanalization. To validate this hypothesis, we analyzed the factors affecting the outcomes of treated aneurysms at our institute. METHODS AND

findingsWe included 355 small and large aneurysms. The following six factors were obtained from every case: aneurysm volume (mL), neck size (mm), packing density (%), residual volume (mL), rupture status at presentation, and stent assistance (with or without stent). The data were then subjected to multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify significant risk factors for recanalization. Recanalization occurred in 61 aneurysms (17.2%). Significant predictors for recanalization were aneurysm volume (odds ratio, 15.3; P < 0.001) and residual volume (odds ratio, 30.9; P < 0.001), but not packing density (odds ratio, 0.98; P = 0.341). These results showed that for each 0.1-mL increase in aneurysm volume and residual volume, the risk of recanalization increased by 1.3 times and 1.4 times, respectively.

conclusionsThe most influential risk factor for recanalization after coil embolization was residual volume, not packing density. The larger the aneurysm volume, the greater the packing density has to be to minimize the residual volume and risk of recanalization. Since tight coil packing has already been aimed, further innovation of coil property or embolization technique may be needed. Otherwise, different treatment modality such as flow diverter or parent artery occlusion may have to be considered.

Indexed as

HumansIntracranial AneurysmRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID27153192
PMCPMC4859523
OpenAlexW2346883923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.