ArticleJournal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery2023
Alterations of vital signs as prognostic factors after intraprocedural rupture of intracranial aneurysms during endovascular treatment.
Article in Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intra-procedural re-rupture during endovascular coiling of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review.Neuroradiology · 2026Pooled it
- A meta-analytic insight into predictors and consequences of intra-procedural rupture in unruptured intracranial aneurysms.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Case Report: Hemorrhagic-Thrombotic Escalation After Intraprocedural Rupture During Stent-Assisted Coiling: A Case-Based Narrative Review and Staged Communication Model.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo report our experience with intraprocedural rupture (IPR) of intracranial aneurysms during endovascular treatment and evaluate alterations in vital signs as independent prognostic factors to predict the outcomes of IPR.
methodsBetween January 2008 and August 2021, 34 patients (8 ruptured and 26 unruptured) were confirmed to have IPR based on our dataset with 3178 endovascular coiling procedures. The patients who underwent additional surgeries related to IPR were classified as the OP group (n=9), while those who did not receive additional surgeries were classified as the non-OP group (n=25). Vital signs were recorded during the procedure by anesthesiologists and analyzed.
resultsOf the 34 patients included in this study, eight initially presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage due to a ruptured aneurysm. The clinical outcomes at discharge were significantly different between the two groups (p=0.046). In the OP group, five patients showed favorable outcomes at discharge, while four showed unfavorable outcomes. In the non-OP group, 23 patients showed favorable outcomes at discharge while two patients showed unfavorable outcomes. Maximal (MAX) systolic blood pressure (SBP) (odds ratio [OR] 1.520, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.084-2.110; p=0.037) and higher differential value MAX-median blood pressure (MBP) (OR 1.322, 95% CI 1.029-1.607; p=0.044) remained independent risk factors for poor prognosis after IPR on multivariate logistic regression analysis.
conclusionsThe MAX SBP and the difference between the maximal and baseline values of MBP are key factors in predicting the prognosis of patients after IPR, as well as providing useful information for predicting the outcome. Further research is required to confirm the relationship between naive pressure and prognosis.
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.