ArticleNeurosurgical review2024
Anterior interhemispheric vs. pterional approach in the microsurgical management of anterior communicating artery aneurysms: a comparative analysis employing a novel multidimensional matching-tool.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multidimensional Comparison of Microsurgical Clipping and Endovascular Techniques for Anterior Communicating Artery Aneurysms: Balancing Occlusion Rates and Periprocedural Risks.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Case Report: Microsurgical clipping of a multilobular fenestrated anterior communicating artery aneurysm: technical challenges with video analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Letter to the editor: "Anterior interhemispheric vs pterional approach in the microsurgical management of anterior communicating aneurysms: a comparative analysis employing a novel multidimensional management-tool".Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
- Comment on, "Comparing the anterior interhemispheric and pterional approaches in the management of anterior communicating artery aneurysms".Neurosurgical review · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The surgical management of anterior communicating artery aneurysms (AcomA) is challenging due to their deep midline position and proximity to complex skull base anatomy. This study compares the pterional craniotomy with the interhemispheric approach based on the specific aneurysm angulation. A total of 129 AcomA cases were analyzed, with 50 undergoing microsurgical clipping via either the pterional or interhemispheric approach. All selected cases had computed tomography-angiography with sagittal imaging slices and 2D-angiography. Using an interactive tool, 14 cases treated via the interhemispheric approach were matched with 14 cases approached pterionally based on clinical and morphological parameters, emphasizing intracranial aneurysm (IA) dome angulation relative to the frontal skull base. Outcomes included IA occlusion, temporary clipping incidence, intraoperative rupture, postoperative strokes, hemorrhages, hydrocephalus, vasospasm, and patient functionality. Matched cohorts had consistent demographics. Both approaches resulted in similar IA occlusion rates, but the interhemispheric approach led to improved clinical outcomes, measured by the modified Rankin Scale. It also had a lower incidence of hydrocephalus and reduced need for permanent ventriculoperitoneal shunt placement. Vasospasms and postoperative infarction rates were comparable between the groups. Our findings suggest potential advantages of the interhemispheric approach in managing AcomA, depending on aneurysm angulation. Despite a small sample size, the results highlight the importance of customized surgical decision-making based on the unique traits of each aneurysm and the surgeon's expertise.
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.