SynthesisNeurosurgical review2022
Clinical outcomes of first- and second-generation hydrogel coils compared with bare platinum coils: a systematic literature review.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hydrogel Coils versus Bare Platinum Coils for the Treatment of Ruptured and Unruptured Aneurysms: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- OnyxGels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- A novel self-expanding shape memory polymer coil for intracranial aneurysm embolization: 1 year follow-up in Chile.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Article
- Efficacy and Safety of Different Bioactive Coils in Intracranial Aneurysm Interventional Treatment, a Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Brain sciences · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endovascular coiling has revolutionized intracranial aneurysm treatment; however, recurrence continues to represent a major limitation. The hydrogel coil was developed to increase packing density and improve neck healing and therefore decrease recurrence rates. In this paper, we review treatment outcomes of first- (1HCs) and second-generation (2HCs) hydrogel coils and compare them to those of bare platinum coils (BPC). A query of multiple databases was performed. Articles with at least 10 aneurysms treated with either 1HC or 2HC were selected for analysis. Collected data included aneurysm size, rupture status, initial occlusion, initial residual neck/aneurysm, packing density, mortality, morbidity, recurrence, and retreatment rates. The primary endpoint was recurrence at final follow-up. Secondary endpoints included residual neck and dome rates as well as procedure-related complications and functional dependence at final follow-up. Studies that compared 1HC to BPC showed significant lower recurrence (24% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.02) and higher packing density (58.5% vs. 24.1%, p < 0.001) in 1HC but no significant difference in initial occlusion rate (p = 0.08). Studies that compared 2HC to BPC showed lower recurrence (6.3% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.007) and retreatment rates (3.4% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.010) as well as higher packing density (36.4% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.002) in 2HC, with similar initial occlusion rate (p = 0.86). The rate of complications was not statistically different between HC (25.5%) and BPC (22.6%, p = 0.06). Based on our review, the 1HC and 2HC achieved higher packing density and lower recurrence rates compared to BPC. The safety profile was similar between both groups.
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.