ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparison of clinical efficacy and safety between interventional embolization and craniotomy clipping for anterior circulation 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 clinical efficacy and safety of interventional embolization in the treatment of anterior circulation aneurysms. Methods: Eighty patients with anterior circulation aneurysms admitted to People's Hospital of Leshan from June 2019 to December 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the different surgical methods, they were divided into two groups: the observation group and the control group. Patients in the observation group were given interventional embolization, while those in the control group were given craniotomy clipping. The surgical efficacy, postoperative neurological function and quality of life, surgical prognosis and surgical complications of the two groups were compared. Results: The intraoperative blood loss and hospitalization time in the observation group were lower than those in the control group ( Conclusion: Interventional embolization shows the advantages of minimally invasive procedures such as shorter operative times and shorter hospital stays. It has better clinical safety because it can significantly improve the neurological function and quality of life of patients, improve the prognosis of patients, and reduce the incidence of complications.
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.