ArticleWorld neurosurgery: X2024
Laser speckle contrast imaging versus microvascular Doppler sonography in aneurysm surgery: A prospective study.
Article in World neurosurgery: X, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- DASHING-LSCI: deep learning-based anatomical multiclass segmentation for human intraoperative neurosurgical guidance - laser speckle contrast imaging.Biomedical optics express · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to compare microvascular Doppler sonography (MDS) and laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) for assessing vessel patency and aneurysm occlusion during microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms. Methods: MDS and LSCI were used after clip placement during six neurovascular procedures including six patients, and agreement between the two techniques was assessed. LSCI was performed in parallel or right after MDS evaluation. The Doppler response was assessed through listening while flow in the LSCI videos was evaluated by three blinded neurovascular surgeons after the surgery. Statistical analysis determined the agreement between the techniques in assessing flow in 18 regions of interest (ROIs). Results: Agreement between MDS and LSCI in assessing vessel patency was observed in 87 % of the ROIs. LSCI accurately identified flow in 93.3 % of assessable ROIs, with no false positive or negative measurements. Three ROIs were not assessable with LSCI due to motion artifacts or poor image quality. No complications were observed. Conclusions: LSCI demonstrated high agreement with MDS in assessing vessel patency during microsurgical clipping of intracranial aneurysms. It provided continuous, real-time, full-field imaging with high spatial resolution and temporal resolution. While MDS allowed evaluation of deep vascular regions, LSCI complemented it by offering unlimited assessment of surrounding vessels.
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.