ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022
Flow diversion treatment for giant intracranial serpentine aneurysms.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Evaluation of Serpentine Aneurysms: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with a Subanalysis for Treatment Approaches.Clinical neuroradiology · 2024Pooled it
- Parent Artery Occlusion for a Giant Serpentine Aneurysm of the Internal Carotid Artery under Electrophysiological Monitoring: A Case Report.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and management for intracranial serpentine aneurysms: a 12-year single-center retrospective analysis of 51 patients.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Giant serpentine aneurysms (GSAs) are among the most complex and challenging type of intracranial aneurysms. Surgical clipping, bypass, or endovascular parent artery occlusion has been the main treatment of GSAs in the past. However, studies on flow diversion (FD) are limited. Therefore, we reported our experience with patients with GSAs treated with FD. Methods: Patients with GSAs treated with FD from 2012 to 2020 in our single center were retrospectively reviewed. Angiographic outcomes were graded according to the O'Kelly-Marotta scale as complete occlusion (D), trace filling (C), entry remnant (B), or aneurysm filling (A). Clinical outcomes were assessed using the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score. We also collected the patients' treatment details and perioperative complications. Results: Thirteen patients with 14 aneurysms were included, including three in the anterior circulation and 11 in the posterior circulation. Grades B-D were found in 72.7% (8/11) of the GSAs. Good prognosis (mRS score, 0-2) was found in 66.7% (8/12) and 50.0% (6/12) of the patients at the 6-month and latest follow-up, respectively. Parent artery occlusion was found in three cases of GSAs. Five postoperative complications were observed, including two minor complications and three major complications. Conclusion: Although reconstructive treatment with FD could be considered as one of the treatment strategies for patients with both anterior and posterior circulation GSAs, however, the risk of complications and parent artery occlusion should be considered.
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.