SynthesisNeuroradiology2017
Flow diversion: what can clinicians learn from animal models?
Synthesis in Neuroradiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distal Flow Diversion with Anti-Thrombotically Coated and Bare Metal Low-Profile Flow Diverters-A Comparison.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Parent Artery Straightening after Flow-Diverter Stenting Improves the Odds of Aneurysm Occlusion.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2022Article
- Anterior Circulation Fusiform Aneurysms Have a Lower Occlusion Rate After Pipeline Embolization Device Treatment Than Posterior Circulation Fusiform Aneurysms: A Multicenter Cohort Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Safety Evaluation and Flow Modification in the Anterior Cerebral Artery after Pipeline Embolization Device Deployment across the Internal Carotid Artery Terminus.BioMed research international · 2021Observational
- Re-treatment of residual aneurysms after flow diversion: An experimental study.The neuroradiology journal · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFlow diversion is increasingly used for treating intracranial aneurysms. This article aims to review the evidence obtained from animal models and summarizes the findings that might be of clinical interest.
methodsFrom a systematic review of studies published between 2000 and 2016, we extracted the data on the following questions: What roles do aneurysm dimension, morphology, and vascular geometry have on success of flow diversion? What characteristics of a flow diverter can influence aneurysm occlusion? What are the risk factors for jailed branch occlusion?
resultsFlow diversion has been shown to be less effective in occluding large aneurysms with wide or undefined necks, as compared to smaller aneurysms with narrower necks. Straight sidewall aneurysms were more likely to occlude after flow diversion than curved sidewall aneurysms or bifurcation aneurysms with branches originating from the neck or the fundus. The main characteristics of devices that may impact on the success of flow diversion are porosity and pore-density, but challenging aneurysm models were not better occluded with devices of lower porosity. Porosity is not uniform when devices deform to adapt to local in vivo anatomy when deployed. Neointima formation on devices correlates with low porosity. Branches are rarely occluded when they are jailed, but persistent branch flow may prevent aneurysm occlusion.
conclusionExperimental models may help anticipate clinical results of flow diversion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28243686What 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.