Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32860104›Full record

SynthesisNeurosurgical review2021

Endovascular reconstruction of iatrogenic internal carotid artery injury following endonasal surgery: a systematic review.

Mohammad Ghorbani, Christoph J Griessenauer, Hamidreza Shojaei, Christoph Wipplinger, Ebrahim Hejazian

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intracranial Internal Carotid Artery Pseudoaneurysm: A Narrative Review and Update for Otolaryngology Residents.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Mohammad GhorbaniDivision of Vascular and Endovascular Neurosurgery, Firoozgar Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7709-3095
Christoph J GriessenauerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2952-3812
Hamidreza ShojaeiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Mazandaran, Iran. shojaei.hamidreza@mail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6197-2888
Christoph WipplingerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9001-6932
Ebrahim HejazianDepartment of Neurosurgery, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Mazandaran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7383-4485
Babol University of Medical Sciences · IRInnsbruck Medical University · ATIran University of Medical Sciences · IRMazandaran University of Medical Sciences · IRParacelsus Medical University · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study is to provide an update on endovascular treatments for iatrogenic internal carotid artery (ICA) injuries following endonasal surgery. A systematic review of the literature was performed by using Medline, Cochrane library, and Scopus from 1999 to 2019. We used a combination of the MeSH terms "internal carotid artery," "iatrogenic disease," and "endovascular procedure." Twenty-six articles including 46 patients were identified for in this systematic review. The mean age of the patients was 49 years (CI: ± 4.2). The most common site of ICA injury was in cavernous segment (18 patients; 39%). The most common type of iatrogenic ICA injury was a traumatic pseudoaneurysm documented in 28 patients (60%). Endoluminal reconstruction was performed using covered stents in 28 patients, the Pipeline embolization device (PED) in 13 patients, the Surpass flow diverter device in three, the SILK flow diverter in one, and one case was treated using a combined approach of a covered stent and a PED. Flow diversion and covered stents resulted in a good clinical outcome in 94% and 89% of patients, respectively. This difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 1.0). Even though this systematic review was limited due to articles of small sample sizes and considerable heterogeneity, the results indicate that flow diverting devices and covered stents are good therapeutic options for endoluminal reconstruction of iatrogenic ICA injuries following endonasal surgery.

Indexed as

Carotid Artery InjuriesCarotid Artery, InternalEmbolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresHumansIatrogenic DiseaseStentsTreatment OutcomeEndovascularIatrogenicInternal carotid arteryTrans-sphenoidal surgery

Identifiers

PMID32860104
OpenAlexW3082269699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.