ArticleJournal of Korean Neurosurgical Society2022
Safety and Efficacy of Flow Diverter Therapy for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm Compared to Traditional Endovascular Strategy : A Multi-Center, Randomized, Open-Label Trial.
Article in Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Regimens in Flow Diversion for Intracranial Aneurysms: a Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Review
- Fusiform versus Saccular Intracranial Aneurysms-Hemodynamic Evaluation of the Pre-Aneurysmal, Pathological, and Post-Interventional State.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEndovascular treatment of large, wide-necked intracranial aneurysms by coil embolization is often complicated by low rates of complete occlusion and high rates of recurrence. A flow diverter device has been shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of not only large and giant unruptured aneurysms, but small and medium aneurysms. However, in Korea, its use has only recently been approved for aneurysms <10 mm. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of flow diversion and coil embolization for the treatment of unruptured aneurysms ≥7 mm.
methodsThe participants will include patients aged between 19 and 75 years to be treated for unruptured cerebral aneurysms ≥7 mm for the first time or for recurrent aneurysms after initial endovascular coil embolization. Participants assigned to a flow diversion cohort will be treated using any of the following devices : Pipeline Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA), Surpass Evolve (Stryker Neurovascular, Fremont, CA, USA), and FRED or FRED Jr. (MicroVention, Tustin, CA, USA). Participants assigned to a coil embolization cohort will undergo traditional endovascular coiling. The primary endpoint will be complete occlusion confirmed by cerebral angiography at 12 months after treatment. Secondary safety outcomes will evaluate periprocedural and post-procedural complications for up to 12 months.
resultsThe trial will begin enrollment in 2022, and clinical data will be available after enrollment and follow-up.
conclusionThis article describes the aim and design of a multi-center, randomized, open-label trial to compare the safety and efficacy of flow diversion versus traditional endovascular treatment for unruptured cerebral aneurysms ≥7 mm.
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.