ArticleDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2022
Flow-diverter treatment for renal artery aneurysms: One-year follow-up of a multicentric preliminary experience.
Article in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endovascular treatment of complex renal artery aneurysm with Pipeline flow-diverter: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Flow Diverting Stents for the Treatment of Complex Visceral and Renal Aneurysms-A Systematic Review.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Study Protocol DEDICATE: Italian Multicenter Study on the Treatment of Visceral Aneurysms with the Derivo Peripher and Derivo 2 Flow Diverter Stent.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Article
- Temporary Flow Diversion in Oncological Embolization Procedures Using Degradable Starch Microspheres.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endovascular treatment of a wide-necked renal artery aneurysm with a flow diverter stent.Radiology case reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE Renal artery aneurysms (RAAs) are rare in the general population, although the true incidence and natural history remain elusive. Conventional endovascular therapies such as coil embolization or covered stent graft may cause sidebranches occlusion, leading to organ infarction. Flow-diverters (FD) have been firstly designed to treat cerebrovascular aneurysms, but their use may be useful to treat complex RAAs presenting sidebraches arising from aneurysmal sac. To evaluate mid-term follow-up (FUP) safety and efficacy of FD during treatment of complex RAAs. METHODS Between November 2019 and April 2020, 7 RAAs were identified in 7 patients (4 men, 3 women; age range 55-82 years; median 67 years) and treated by FD. Procedural details, complications, morbidity and mortality, aneurysm occlusion and segmental artery patency were retrospectively reviewed. Twelve months computed tomography angiography (CTA) FUP was evaluated for all cases. RESULT Deployment of FD was successful in all cases. One intraprocedural technical complication was encountered with one FD felt down into aneurism sac which requiring additional telescopic stenting. One case at 3 months CTA FUP presented same complication, requiring same rescue technique. At 12 months CTA FUP 5 cases of size shrinkage and 2 cases of stable size were documented. No rescue surgery or major intraprocedural or mid-term FUP complication was seen. CONCLUSION Complex RAAs with two or more sidebranches can be safely treated by FD. FD efficacy for RAA needs a further validation at long term FUP by additional large prospective studies.
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.