ArticleScientific reports2024
Use of the Tubridge flow diverter in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a single center experience.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case Report: Application of the LVIS stent as a bridging device for salvage treatment of malapposed lattice flow diverter in a giant posterior circulation aneurysm: technical note and clinical efficacy.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Preliminary experience of Tubridge Plus flow diverter in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To investigate the safety and effect of Tubridge flow diverter deployment for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms, 85 patients with intracranial aneurysms treated with the Tubridge flow diverter were retrospectively enrolled. The clinical data including the baseline data, aneurysm parameters before and after treatment, and follow-up outcomes were assessed. Among 85 patients, there were 35 (41.2%) males and 50 females (58.8%) aged 17-77 (mean 56.7 ± 11.1) years with 110 aneurysms. Five (5.9%) patients initially presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage from aneurysm rupture. The aneurysm size was 2-30 (mean 8.6) mm, and the aneurysm neck was 2-10.6 (mean 5.7 ± 2.3) mm. Ninety-three Tubridge stents were deployed. Twenty-five (29.4%) patients experienced adjunctive loose coiling. Blood flow was significantly reduced from entering the aneurysm after stent deployment. Periprocedural complications occurred in three (3.5%) patients, including in-stent thrombosis during embolization in one patient (1.2%), conjunctiva edema on the right in one patient (1.2%), and acute multiple cerebral infarctions in one patient (1.2%). Angiographic follow-up was conducted in 67 (78.8%) patients 3-36 (mean 15.3 ± 5.6) months later. In 11 (16.4% or 11/67) patients, blood flow still entered the aneurysm with the O'Kelly-Marotta (OKM) grade B in two (3.0%) patients and grade C in nine (13.4%), whereas complete occlusion (OKM grade D) was achieved in the other 56 (83.6% or 56/67) aneurysms. In-stent stenosis was present in five (7.5%) patients with approximately 25% stenosis in three (4.5%) patients and 50% in two (3.0%). In conclusion, the Tubridge flow diverter can be safely and efficiently applied in the treatment of small and large intracranial aneurysms, with a low periprocedural complication rate, a high occlusion degree, and a low in-stent stenosis rate at follow-up even though large aneurysms may necessitate a longer surgical time and adjunctive coiling.
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.