ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparative study on the clinical outcomes and prognosis of endovascular embolization and craniotomy clipping for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endovascular embolization for ruptured intracranial aneurysms: efficacy and effects on oxidative stress levels.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2025Article
- Combined microscopic and neuroendoscopic treatment effects on psychological and cognitive outcomes in ruptured intracranial aneurysms.World journal of psychiatry · 2025Article
- Frequency of Cerebral Aneurysm in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage on CT Cerebral Angiography.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
- Efficacy of endovascular embolization versus microsurgical clamping in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a meta-analysis.American journal of translational research · 2024Review
- Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the safety and outcomes of endovascular embolization and craniotomy clipping in the treatment of cerebral aneurysms. Methods: We collected the clinical data of 106 patients with cerebral aneurysm who underwent surgical treatment (endovascular embolization, Group-A, n=55; craniotomy clipping, Group-B, n=51) in the First People's Hospital of Yichang from January 2020 to May 2021. We compared surgical treatment indexes, treatment costs, neurological function before and after the treatment, incidence of postoperative complications and the prognosis after one-year follow-up between the two groups. Results: Endovascular embolization (Group-A) was associated with a shorter mean operation time and hospital stay, a lower mean intraoperative bleeding amount, and a higher mean treatment cost than craniotomy clipping (Group-B) ( Conclusion: Endovascular embolization for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms is safe as it can shorten the operation time and hospital stay, reduce the incidence of neurological injury and complications, and have a favorable prognosis. However, the treatment is more expensive. Endovascular embolization can be selected for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms when economic conditions allow it.
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.