SynthesisNeurosurgical review2024
Maxillary artery utilization in subcranial-intracranial bypass procedures: a comprehensive systematic review and pooled analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2024. 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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The utilization of the internal maxillary artery (IMAX) in subcranial-intracranial bypass for revascularization in complex aneurysms, tumors, or refractory ischemia shows promise. However, robust evidence concerning its outcomes is lacking. Hence, the authors embarked on a systematic review with pooled analysis to elucidate the efficacy of this approach. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases following PRISMA guidelines. Included articles used the IMAX as a donor vessel for revascularizing an intracranial area and reported at least one of the following outcomes: patency, complications, or clinical data. Favorable outcomes were defined as the absence of neurologic deficits or improvement in the baseline condition. Complications were considered any adverse event directly related to the procedure. Out of 418 retrieved articles, 26 were included, involving 183 patients. Among them, 119 had aneurysms, 41 experienced ischemic strokes (transient or not), 2 had arterial occlusions, and 3 had neoplasia. Furthermore, 91.8% of bypasses used radial artery grafts, and 87.9% revascularized the middle cerebral artery territory. The median average follow-up period was 12 months (0.3-53.1). The post-operation patency rate was 99% (95% CI: 97-100%; I2=0%), while the patency rate at follow-up was 82% (95% CI: 68-96%; I2=77%). Complications occurred in 21% of cases (95% CI: 9-32%; I2=58%), with no significant procedure-related mortality in 0% (95% CI: 0-2%; I2=0%). Favorable outcomes were observed in 88% of patients (95% CI: 81-96%; I2=0%), and only 3% experienced ischemia (95% CI: 0-6%; I2=0%). The subcranial-intracranial bypass with the IMAX shows excellent postoperative patency and considerable favorable clinical outcomes. While complications exist, the procedure carries a minimal risk of mortality. However, long-term patency presents heterogeneous findings, warranting additional research.
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.