ReviewNeurosurgical review2022
The prognosis and treatment effectiveness of de novo aneurysm formation after radiation therapy for brain tumor.
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A coexisting pseudoaneurysm hidden behind a saccular distal middle cerebral artery aneurysm in long-standing postirradiation vasculopathy: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radiation therapy is a well-established, minimally invasive method of treating brain tumors. In recent years, the number of post-radiotherapy patients has increased, and delayed side effects are evident. De novo aneurysm formation after radiation often manifests as fatal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), resulting in severe clinical outcomes. Nevertheless, the prognosis and therapeutic efficacy of radiation-induced aneurysms (RIAs) remain unclear. Using the PubMed database from 1980 to 2021, we screened 45 articles (53 individual cases) on RIAs; approximately 70% of RIAs were diagnosed after rupture. Of 38 ruptured RIAs, 12 (31.6%) had modified Rankin scale (mRS) 5-6. On the other hand, all unruptured RIAs (15 cases) recovered without neurological deficits (p = 0.012). Ten of the 39 ruptured RIAs were treated surgically, and 22 were treated endovascularly. There was no significant difference in mRS between treatment modalities (p = 0.393), but conservative therapy was significantly related to unfavorable outcomes (p = 0.025). To improve clinical outcomes, RIAs need to be diagnosed before rupture. Surgeons should be aware of de novo aneurysm formation in patients long after radiation therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35648321What 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.