Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33404790›Full record

SynthesisNeuroradiology2021

Comparison between stenting and conservative management of posterior circulation perforator aneurysms: Systematic review and case series.

Danilo Gardijan, Tomislav Herega, Vedran Premužić, Ivan Jovanović, David Ozretić, Zdravka Poljaković, Marko Radoš

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Application of convolutional network models in detection of intracranial aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Danilo GardijanDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8641-4807
Tomislav HeregaDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia. therega@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3662-1960
Vedran PremužićDepartment of Nephrology, Hypertension, Dialysis and Transplantation, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6264-6809
Ivan JovanovićDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1248-1345
David OzretićDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2154-1506
Zdravka PoljakovićDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7216-6478
Marko RadošDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Centre Zagreb, Kišpatićeva 12, 10000, Zagreb, Croatia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1922-1220
University Hospital Centre Zagreb · HR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePosterior circulation perforator aneurysms (PCPAs) are a rare type of intracranial aneurysms whose natural history and optimal clinical management are still largely unexplored. This study aims to report our experience with treating ruptured PCPAs and to provide a systematic review of the literature to compare the two most established treatment options, endovascular stenting, and conservative management including administration of antifibrinolytic drugs and watchful waiting.

methodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Major databases were searched for case reports and case report series written in the English language between 1995 and 2020. Additionally, we retrospectively reviewed our stroke center database for cases of ruptured PCPAs between January 2014 and July 2020. Endovascular stenting and conservative treatment were compared using endpoints, including favorable outcome rate (mRS 0-2), occlusion rate, mortality rate, periinterventional complication rate, and re-hemorrhage rate.

resultsWe identified 31 patients treated endovascularly using stents and 33 patients treated conservatively, with the administration of antifibrinolytic drugs in 3 of them. Our analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the groups, except for the occlusion rate.

conclusionsThe optimal management strategy of PCPAs is still unknown, but stenting can be considered as an effective occlusion method with an acceptable complication rate. Preventive ventricular drainage may be necessary due to the high hydrocephalus rate encountered in ruptured PCPAs.

Indexed as

Aneurysm, RupturedEmbolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresIntracranial AneurysmCerebral AngiographyConservative TreatmentHumansRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment OutcomeAneurysmPerforatorPosterior circulationStent-in-stentSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Identifiers

PMID33404790
OpenAlexW3120592871

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.