SynthesisAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2022
The Safety and Efficacy of Flow Diversion versus Conventional Endovascular Treatment for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Meta-analysis of Real-world Cohort Studies from the Past 10 Years.
Synthesis in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flow diverter with or without adjunctive coils in the treatment of large and giant intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- A novel flow diverter device (Tubridge) for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2023Pooled it
- Impact of anxiety and mood disorders on elective flow diversion for unruptured intracranial aneurysms: propensity score-matched analyses of two large databases.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2026Article
- Technique and device specific diffusion-weighted imaging detected ischemic lesions and occlusion outcomes in endovascular treatment of unruptured aneurysms.Acta neurochirurgica · 2026Article
- Patient Management After Flow Diversion for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: a Literature Review and DELPHI Consensus.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Review
- Article
- Stent-Assisted Coiling vs. Flow Diversion in Unruptured Anterior Circulation Aneurysms: A Single-Center Cohort Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Extracranial Vertebral Artery Dissecting Aneurysm Presenting as Vertebrobasilar Stroke in a Young Adult: Case Report of Flow-Diverter Stenting.Neurology international · 2025Article
- FRED X flow diversion stent for intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neuroradiology · 2025Review
- Conventional endovascular treatment and flow diverter for unruptured small- and medium-sized paraophthalmic segment aneurysms.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Appraisal of the Flow Diversion Effect Provided by Braided Intracranial Stents.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Reconstructive endovascular treatment for basilar artery trunk aneurysms: complications and clinical and angiography outcomes.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Article
- In reply.European stroke journal · 2023Article
- Return-to-fly after flow diversion for unruptured paraclinoid aneurysms in military pilots.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the flow diverter has advantages in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms, pooled studies that directly compare it with conventional endovascular treatments are rare. PURPOSE: Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of flow-diverter and conventional endovascular treatments in intracranial aneurysms. DATA SOURCES: We performed a comprehensive search of the literature using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database. STUDY SELECTION: We included only studies that directly compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of flow-diverter and conventional endovascular treatments. DATA ANALYSIS: Random effects or fixed effects meta-analysis was used to pool the cumulative rate of short- and long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eighteen studies with 1001 patients with flow diverters and 1133 patients with conventional endovascular treatments were included; 1015 and 1201 aneurysm procedures were performed, respectively. The flow-diverter group had aneurysms of a larger size (standard mean difference, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03-0.41; LIMITATIONS: Limitations include a retrospective, observational design in some studies, high heterogeneity, and selection bias.
conclusionsCompared with the conventional endovascular treatments, the placement of a flow diverter may lead to more procedure-related complications, but there is no difference in safety, and it is more effective in the long term.
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.