Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38896270›Full record

ArticleClinical neuroradiology2024

Propensity Score-matched Comparison of WEB 17 and WEB 21 with 4-7 mm Device Sizes for the Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms.

Lukas Goertz, Thomas Liebig, Eberhard Siebert, David Zopfs, Lenhard Pennig, Marc Schlamann, Alexandra Radomi, Franziska Dorn, Christoph Kabbasch

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Lukas GoertzDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. lukas.goertz@uk-koeln.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2620-7611
Thomas LiebigDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Hospital Munich (LMU), Marchioninistraße 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Eberhard SiebertDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Berlin (Charité), Charitéplatz 1, 10118, Berlin, Germany.
David ZopfsDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Lenhard PennigDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Marc SchlamannDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Alexandra RadomiDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Hospital Munich (LMU), Marchioninistraße 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Franziska DornDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Christoph KabbaschDepartment of Radiology and Neuroradiology, University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital, Kerpener Straße 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe WEB 17 system represents the fifth generation of Woven Endobridge (WEB) flow disruptors and features a low profile with fewer wires than its predecessor, the WEB 21. The present study compares the safety and efficacy of the WEB 17 and WEB 21 for the treatment of unruptured cerebral aneurysms with 4-7 mm device sizes, which were available for both systems.

methodsPatient and aneurysm characteristics, complications, clinical outcome and angiographic results were retrospectively analysed. 1:1 propensity score matching was performed to adjust for minor baseline differences between the groups.

resultsSixty aneurysms treated with WEB 21 and 90 with WEB 17 were included. The overall failure rate (deployment failure and adjunctive stent) was significantly higher with WEB 21 (16.7%) than with WEB 17 (3.3%, p < 0.01). The rates of neurological events between WEB 21 (6.7%) and WEB 17 treatment (1.1%) were not significantly different (p = 0.08). Also, procedural morbidity was comparably low in both groups (WEB 21: 3.3%, WEB 17: 0%, p = 0.16). The rates of complete/adequate occlusion at follow up were 69.7%/86.4% for WEB 17 vs. 80.4%/91.3% for WEB 21 at short-term (p = 0.27), and 64.5%/83.9% vs. 75.9%/86.2% at mid-term (p = 0.41), respectively. Propensity score matching confirmed the results of the unmatched series.

conclusionWEB 17 and WEB 21 had a similar safety and efficacy profile, but WEB 17 was associated with an improved feasibility. Prospective studies with long-term follow-up will define the full potential of the WEB 17 system.

Indexed as

Intracranial AneurysmPropensity ScoreAdultAgedEmbolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresEquipment Failure AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment OutcomeEndovascularFlow-disruptionIntracranial aneurysmIntrasaccular

Identifiers

PMID38896270
PMCPMC11564397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.