ArticleNeuroradiology2021
Visualization of flow diverter stent wall apposition during intracranial aneurysm treatment using a virtually diluted cone beam CT technique (Vessel ASSIST).
Article in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Proposed Grading Scale Based on Radiographic Imaging for Wall Apposition to Estimate Neurologic Complications after Flow Diverter Treatment.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- A Comparability Study Between Intravenous Contrast-Enhanced Cone-Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and Magnetic Resonance Angiography (MRA) on the Post-Treatment Follow-Up of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Single-Center Prospective Cohort Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of contrast medium injection pressure on angiographic image quality.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Article
- Cone-beam CT angiography to assess the microvascular anatomy of intracranial arterial dissections.The neuroradiology journal · 2022Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFlow diverters (FD) have poor radiopacity, challenging visualization of deployment and vessel wall apposition with conventional neuroimaging modalities. We evaluated a novel cone beam computed tomography (CT) imaging technique that allows virtual dilution (VD) of contrast media to facilitate workflow and ensure accurate assessment of FD wall apposition.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated all patients treated for intracranial aneurysms with FD at our institution between November 2018 and November 2019. Undiluted injected dual cone beam CT acquisitions performed post-stenting were displayed with VD software (GE Healthcare). The resulting images were compared with conventional two-dimensional (2D) digital subtraction angiography (DSA) images. Two neurointerventionalists (Reader 1 and Reader 2, (R1, R2)) independently assessed FD deployment and wall apposition. Confidence in the diagnosis, inter-reader agreement, and X-ray exposure were assessed.
resultsA total of 27 cases were reviewed. FD deployment and wall apposition scores were 4.2 ± 1.0 (R1) and 4.0 ± 1.1 (R2) for DSA and 3.7 ± 1.2 (R1) and 4.1 ± 1.0 (R2) for VD. Confidence in the diagnosis was improved with VD, with scores of 3.7 ± 0.7 (R1) and 4.0 ± 0.7 (R2) using DSA and 4.9 ± 0.2 (R1) and 4.9 ± 0.2 (R2) using VD (P < 0.001). Inter-reader agreement using 2D DSA was improved from moderate (0.49324) to good (0.7272) (P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in inter-reader agreement in the deployment assessment (P = 0.68) or dose-area product (P = 0.54) between techniques.
conclusionVD imaging with dual cone beam CT enables accurate assessment of FD wall apposition after deployment with greater confidence and improved inter-reader agreement versus conventional 2D DSA alone, with comparable X-ray exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32740710What 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.