Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34042530›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society2022

Preventive screening for intracranial aneurysms.

Gabriel Je Rinkel, Ynte M Ruigrok

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Epigenetic mechanisms in aneurysm formation, growth, and rupture: A systematic review.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Overview of ADPKD in Pregnancy.Kidney international reports · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gabriel Je RinkelDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, UMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ynte M RuigrokDepartment of Neurology and Neurosurgery, UMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5396-2989
University Medical Center Utrecht · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubarachnoid hemorrhage from rupture of an intracranial aneurysm (aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage) is a devastating subset of stroke. Since brain damage from the initial hemorrhage is a major cause for the poor outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, prevention of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage has the highest potential to prevent poor outcome from aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.

aimIn this review, we describe the groups at high risk of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage who may benefit from preventive screening for unruptured intracranial aneurysms followed by preventive treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms found. Furthermore, we describe the advantages and disadvantages of screening and advise how to perform counseling on screening. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: Modeling studies show that persons with two or more affected first-degree relatives with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) are candidates for screening for unruptured intracranial aneurysms. One modeling study also suggests that persons with only one affected first-degree relative with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage are also likely candidates for screening. Another group who may benefit from screening are persons ≥35 years who smoke(d) and are hypertensive, given their high lifetime risk of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage of up to 7%, but the prevalence of unruptured intracranial aneurysms in such persons and the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of screening in this group are not yet known. The ultimate goal of screening is to increase the number of quality years of life of the screening candidates, and therefore the benefits but also many downsides of screening -such as risk of incidental findings, very small unruptured intracranial aneurysms that require regular follow-up, preventive treatment with inherent risk of complications and anxiety - should be discussed with the candidate so that an informed decision can be made before intracranial vessels are imaged.

conclusionsSeveral groups of persons who may benefit from screening have been identified, but since these constitute only a minority of all aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage patients, additional high-risk groups still need to be identified. Further research is also needed to identify persons at low or high risk of aneurysmal development and rupture within the groups identified thus far to improve the efficiency of screening. Moreover, if new medical treatment strategies that can reduce the risk of rupture of unruptured intracranial aneurysm become available, the groups of persons who may benefit from screening could increase considerably.

Indexed as

Aneurysm, RupturedIntracranial AneurysmPolycystic Kidney, Autosomal DominantStrokeSubarachnoid HemorrhageHumansMass ScreeningfamilialIntracranial aneurysmscreeningsubarachnoid hemorrhage

Identifiers

PMID34042530
PMCPMC8739572
OpenAlexW3164564054

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.