ArticleBrain sciences2022
Management of Cavernous Carotid Artery Aneurysms: A Retrospective Single-Center Experience.
Article in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Natural history and treatment of asymptomatic unruptured carotid cavernous aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Pooled it
- Flow diversion for compressive unruptured internal carotid artery aneurysms with neuro-ophthalmological symptoms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Cavernous Sinus Right Internal Carotid Artery Aneurysm With Ipsilateral Oculomotor Nerve Palsy: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWhile cavernous carotid aneurysms can cause neurological symptoms, their often-uneventful natural course and the increasing options of intravascular aneurysm closure call for educated decision-making. However, evidence-based guidelines are missing. Here, we report 64 patients with cavernous carotid aneurysms, their respective therapeutic strategies, and follow-up.
methodsWe included all patients with cavernous carotid aneurysms who presented to our clinic between 2014 and 2020 and recorded comorbidities (elevated blood pressure, diabetes mellitus, and nicotine consumption), PHASES score, aneurysm site, size and shape, therapeutic strategy, neurological deficits, and clinical follow-up.
resultsThe mean age of the 64 patients (86% female) was 53 years, the mean follow-up time was 3.8 years. A total of 22 patients suffered from cranial nerve deficit. Of these patients, 50% showed a relief of symptoms regardless of the therapy regime. We found no significant correlations between aneurysm size or PHASES score and the occurrence of neurological symptoms.
conclusionIf aneurysm specific symptoms persist over a longer period of time, relief is difficult to achieve despite aneurysm treatment. Patients should be advised by experts in neurovascular centers, weighing the possibility of an uneventful course against the risks of treatment. In this regard, more detailed prospective data is needed to improve individual patient counseling.
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.