ArticleCVIR endovascular2021
Use of the Cascade expandable net to treat cerebral vasospasm - initial clinical experience from a single centre with in vitro benchside tests.
Article in CVIR endovascular, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stent Angioplasty for the Treatment of Cerebral Vasospasm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- The endovascular treatment strategies of cerebrovascular injuries in traumatic brain injury.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2025Review
- The Stream Device-A Retrospective Review of 51 Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of self-expanding stents to treat post-hemorrhagic cerebral vasospasm was recently described. We sought to determine the clinical efficacy of the Cascade device to treat delayed cerebral vasospasm (DCV). We performed benchside tests to determine the chronic outward force exerted by the Cascade in comparison to the Solitaire.
methodsThe chronic outward force (COF) of the Cascade M agile and Cascade L Agile was tested with equivalent tests of the Solitaire 4x20mm. Further tests to determine the forces generated in pre-formed tubes of 1.5-6 mm were performed using both fully and partially unsheathed Cascades. A retrospective review to identify all patients with aSAH and DCV treated with a Cascade device between January 2020 and July 2021. We recorded the treatment arterial vessel diameters and hemorrhagic or ischemic complications.
resultsIn vitro the Cascade generated greater radial force than the Solitaire. The force generated by the Cascade M Agile at 1.5 mm was approximately 64% higher than the Solitaire 6x40mm and approximately 350% higher than the Solitaire 4x20mm. 4 patients with DCV were identified all of whom were treated with a cascade device. In all cases there was a significant improvement in the diameter of the vasospastic vessels treated with an average diameter increase of approximately 300%. There were no complications from the Cascade. Delayed CT angiography showed persistent dilatation of the segments treated with the Cascade at 24 h.
conclusionThe Cascade is a safe and effective device when used to treat DCV secondary to aSAH. Larger studies are required to validate our initial results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.