Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34549662›Full record

ArticleInterventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences2022

Comparison of transradial and transfemoral access for the Woven EndoBridge embolization of intracranial aneurysms: A single-center experience.

Nimer Adeeb, Mahmoud Dibas, Abdallah Amireh, Sandeep Kandregula, Hugo Cuellar

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Nimer AdeebDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ochsner LSU Medical Center, 5779Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, USA.
Mahmoud DibasDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ochsner LSU Medical Center, 5779Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1690-1084
Abdallah AmirehDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ochsner LSU Medical Center, 5779Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8276-9582
Sandeep KandregulaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ochsner LSU Medical Center, 5779Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, USA.
Hugo CuellarDepartment of Neurosurgery, Ochsner LSU Medical Center, 5779Louisiana State University, Shreveport, LA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8348-4535

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransradial access has been adopted more commonly in the neuroendovascular field. However, the experience of using this access for the Woven EndoBridge embolization of intracranial aneurysms is still in the early stage.

objectiveThis study aimed to compare the outcomes between transradial access and transfemoral access for the Woven EndoBridge embolization of intracranial aneurysms.

methodsThis is a retrospective analysis of consecutive intracranial aneurysms treated with Woven EndoBridge placement between May 2019 and August 2020 by the senior author at a high-volume center. The aneurysms of all sizes and locations treated with Woven EndoBridge placement with or without adjunctive stent or coiling were included. Patient demographics, aneurysm and treatment characteristics, procedural complications, and angiographic and functional outcomes were compared between two approaches.

resultsThis study included a total of 34 patients with intracranial aneurysms (median age 60 years, female-to-male ratio 2:1). Of these, the radial access was utilized in 20 (58.8%) patients, while the femoral access was used in 14 (41.2%) patients. A Woven EndoBridge device was successfully deployed in all cases, and none of the patients required a crossover to another access. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, procedure time and fluoroscopy time, outcomes, and complication rates between both groups.

conclusionOur report suggests the possible feasibility and safety of the transradial access for the Woven EndoBridge embolization of intracranial aneurysms. However, the results of this study are suggestive rather than conclusive, and there is still a need for future large prospective studies.

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresIntracranial AneurysmAneurysmFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeaneurysmsembolizationintracranialtransfemoralTransradialWoven EndoBridge

Identifiers

PMID34549662
PMCPMC9511614

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.