ArticleJournal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery2024
Multiple telescopic stenting versus single flow diverter for the treatment of vertebral artery dissecting aneurysm.
Article in Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery, 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveReconstruction methods, including stent-assisted coiling, multiple telescopic stents, and flow diverters, are preferred modalities for the treatment of unruptured vertebral artery dissecting aneurysms (VADAs). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between two reconstructive flow diversion techniques: single flow diverter (FD) device and multiple telescopic stenting (TS).
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 39 patients with unruptured VADAs. Of these, 17 patients were treated with multiple TS and 22 with a single FD device. Aneurysm characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups.
resultsAll aneurysms included in this study successfully achieved flow diversion, regardless of the treatment modality and duration. However, the mean procedure duration to complete the diversion was shorter in the FD group. Subgroup analysis in TS group showed that there were no significant clinical differences between the low-profile visualized intraluminal support and Enterprise stents, except for the mean procedure duration.
conclusionsBoth the single FD and multiple TS methods showed excellent angiographic and clinical outcomes in the treatment of unruptured VADAs. However, single FD required a shorter procedure duration and was associated with faster achievement of complete flow diversion.
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.