Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33541906›Full record

ReviewAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2021

A Review of Robotic Interventional Neuroradiology.

C B Beaman, N Kaneko, P M Meyers, S Tateshima

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. First-in-human use of SmartGUIDENeuroradiology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. In vitro comparison of manual and robotic endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Robotics for Neuroendovascular Therapy.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2025
    Review
  16. The pioneering past and cutting-edge future of interventional neuroradiology.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2024
    Review
  17. Modeling optimal patient transport in a stroke network capable of remote telerobotic endovascular therapy.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Current State of Robotics in Interventional Radiology.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2023
    Review
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

C B BeamanDepartment of Neurology (C.B.B.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York cb3333@cumc.columbia.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-5425-8849
N KanekoDepartment of Radiological Sciences (N.K., S.T.), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0002-3579-7908
P M MeyersDepartment of Radiology and Neurological Surgery (P.M.M.), Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-3250-5543
S TateshimaDepartment of Radiological Sciences (N.K., S.T.), David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California.ORCID 0000-0003-0060-0930

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic interventional neuroradiology is an emerging field with the potential to enhance patient safety, reduce occupational hazards, and expand systems of care. Endovascular robots allow the operator to precisely control guidewires and catheters from a lead-shielded cockpit located several feet (or potentially hundreds of miles) from the patient. This has opened up the possibility of expanding telestroke networks to patients without access to life-saving procedures such as stroke thrombectomy and cerebral aneurysm occlusion by highly-experienced physicians. The prototype machines, first developed in the early 2000s, have evolved into machines capable of a broad range of techniques, while incorporating newly automated maneuvers and safety algorithms. In recent years, preliminary clinical research has been published demonstrating the safety and feasibility of the technology in cerebral angiography and intracranial intervention. The next step is to conduct larger, multisite, prospective studies to assess generalizability and, ultimately, improve patient outcomes in neurovascular disease.

Indexed as

HumansNervous System DiseasesRadiography, InterventionalRoboticsStrokeTelemedicineThrombectomy

Identifiers

PMID33541906
PMCPMC8115357

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.