ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
A Comparative Evaluation of Standard and Balloon-Assisted Coiling of Intracranial Aneurysms Based on Neurophysiological Monitoring.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Balloon inflation predicts recanalization of intracranial aneurysms treated with coiling alone.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Endovascular Therapy Effectiveness for Unruptured Saccular Intracranial Aneurysms.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Endovascular Treatment of Wide-Neck Bifurcation Aneurysm: Recent Trends in Coil Embolization with Adjunctive Technique.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2024Review
- Diffusion-weighted imaging lesions after endovascular treatment of cerebral aneurysms: A network meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeIntracranial aneurysms are commonly treated with balloon-assisted endovascular coiling because the balloon allows for the control und modulation of wide-necked aneurysms and the coil basket. However, this approach might be associated with a higher complication rate. This retrospective study compared the multimodal results between balloon-assisted coiling of aneurysms (group 1) and coiling without balloon assistance (group 2). MATERIALS AND
methodsWe included 67 patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms in this retrospective analysis; acutely ruptured aneurysms were excluded from the analysis. We divided these patients into two groups and evaluated them for symptomatic thromboembolic complications in the course of intracranial aneurysm treatment. All patients had an intrainterventional neurophysiological monitoring (IINM) and a pre- and postinterventional NIH Stoke Scale (NIHSS) survey and MR imaging. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess whether balloon-assisted coiling increased the rate of thromboembolic complications. Periprocedural aneurysm hemorrhage did not occur in any of the cases.
resultsWe detected no statistically significant difference in rates of neurophysiological disturbances (19.5% (group 1) versus 34.6% (group 2);
conclusionThe use of balloon-assisted coiling did not increase the rate of neurological disturbances during endovascular coiling. MR imaging and NIHSS survey also showed no increased risk of embolization from balloon-assisted aneurysm coiling. IINM is a central aspect of care during endovascular coiling as it can substantially decrease morbidity.
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.