ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Clinical and Hemodynamic Features of Aneurysm Rupture in Coil Embolization of Intracranial Aneurysms.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intra-procedural re-rupture during endovascular coiling of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review.Neuroradiology · 2026Pooled it
- A meta-analytic insight into predictors and consequences of intra-procedural rupture in unruptured intracranial aneurysms.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Occipital Pial AVM Rupture in a Young Adult: Dual Intranidal Aneurysms, Solitary Parasagittal SSS Drainage, and Hematoma-Corridor Microsurgical Cure.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in Cerebrovascular Imaging and Interventions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
Intraprocedural rupture (IPR) during coil embolization (CE) of an intracranial aneurysm is a significant clinical concern that necessitates a comprehensive understanding of its clinical and hemodynamic predictors. Between January 2012 and December 2023, 435 saccular cerebral aneurysms were treated with CE at our institution. The inclusion criterion was extravasation or coil protrusion during CE. Postoperative data were used to confirm rupture points, and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis was performed to assess hemodynamic characteristics, focusing on maximum pressure (Pmax) and wall shear stress (WSS). IPR occurred in six aneurysms (1.3%; three ruptured and three unruptured), with a dome size of 4.7 ± 1.8 mm and a D/N ratio of 1.5 ± 0.5. There were four aneurysms in the internal carotid artery (ICA), one in the anterior cerebral artery, and one in the middle cerebral artery. ICA aneurysms were treated using adjunctive techniques (three balloon-assisted, one stent-assisted). Two aneurysms (M1M2 and A1) were treated simply, yet had relatively small and misaligned domes. CFD analysis identified the rupture point as a flow impingement zone with Pmax in five aneurysms (83.3%). Time-averaged WSS was locally reduced around this area (1.3 ± 0.7 [Pa]), significantly lower than the aneurysmal dome (
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.