ArticleBiomedicines2024
A 5-Year Follow-Up after Endovascular Treatment of 402 Intracranial Aneurysms-A Single-Centre Experience.
Article in Biomedicines, 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.
- Improving Outcomes: Early Nursing Functional Evaluation of Patients with Intracranial Aneurysms After Surgery-Preliminary Results.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Preoperative coagulation parameters predict postoperative bleeding after endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: A retrospective cohort study.The Journal of international medical research · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of our study was to evaluate the early and long-term clinical and morphological outcomes of the endovascular treatment of ruptured and non-ruptured intracranial aneurysms in a cohort of patients from a single centre. We retrospectively analysed the treatment outcomes of 402 endovascularly treated intracranial aneurysms with an average follow-up of 5.5 years. All included patients were treated with endovascular techniques (coil, stent or both). We analysed patient demographics, risk factors for an aneurysm rupture, aneurysm characteristics, and clinical and angiographic complications and outcomes. We analysed and compared the data from the two groups, ruptured aneurysms (RAs) and unruptured aneurysms (UAs), separately. Out of the 318 patients included, a good early clinical outcome was achieved in 78.5% of RAs and in 95.3% of UAs. No complications occurred in 87.71% of patients with UAs and in 80.45% with RAs. The periprocedural rupture rate for UAs and RAs was 0.8% and 2.2%, respectively. The rate of thromboembolic events was 4.8 and 8% for UAs and RAs, respectively. A retreatment due to the recanalisation was required in 9.21% of patients with UAs and in 16.66% of patients with RAs. The results from our centre showed an overall favourable clinical outcome with acceptable periprocedural complications for both RAs and UR aneurysms and proved the endovascular method as safe and effective in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms.
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.