ReviewJournal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences2019
Endovascular coiling versus surgical clipping for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling for patients with ruptured anterior circulation aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2024Pooled it
- Explainable machine learning in outcome prediction of high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.Aging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage is a relatively rare cause of stroke, carrying a bad prognosis of mortality and disability. The current standard procedure, neurosurgical clipping, has failed to achieve satisfactory outcomes. Therefore, endovascular detachable coils have been tested as an alternative. This meta-analysis was aimed to compare the outcomes of surgical clipping and endovascular coiling in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. MATERIALS AND
methodsRelevant randomized trials up to June 2018 were identified from Medline, Central, and Web of Science. Data for poor outcomes (Modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 3 to 6) at 2-3 months, 1 year, and 3-5 years were extracted and analyzed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using RevMan software.
resultsFive studies (2780: 1393 and 1387 patients in the coiling and clipping arms, respectively) were included in the current analysis. The overall effect estimate favored endovascular coiling over surgical clipping in terms of reducing poor outcomes (death or dependency, mRS > 2) at 1 year (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.57-0.79) and 3-5 years (OR = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.67-0.96). Moreover, coiling was associated with a significantly lower rate of cerebral ischemia (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16-0.86). Postprocedural mortality (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.6-1.05) and rebleeding (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.75-1.78) rates were comparable between the two groups. However, technical failure was significantly more common with coiling interventions than with clipping surgeries (OR = 2.84, 95% CI: 1.86-4.34).
conclusionOur analysis suggests that coiling can be a better alternative to clipping in terms of surgical outcomes. Further improvements in the coiling technique and training may improve the outcomes of this procedure.
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.