ArticleActa neurochirurgica2024
Outcomes and predictors of intraprocedural rupture in patients with cerebral aneurysm.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Outcomes following intraoperative rupture of cerebral aneurysms during microsurgical clipping: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Case Report: Hemorrhagic-Thrombotic Escalation After Intraprocedural Rupture During Stent-Assisted Coiling: A Case-Based Narrative Review and Staged Communication Model.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Transcranial fully endoscopic clipping techniques for ruptured aneurysms: an initial experience from a single center.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntraprocedural rupture (IPR) is a devastating complication of cerebral aneurysm treatment. While several studies have investigated its risk factors and clinical impact, further research with larger populations is warranted.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed data from 4,039 patients with 4,233 cerebral aneurysms treated at our institution between January 2009 and December 2018. Multivariate logistic regression with stepwise elimination was performed to identify the independent risk factors of IPR. Unfavorable clinical outcome was defined as a Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≥ 3 points at 3 months post-treatment.
resultsIPR occurred in 61 (1.44%) of the 4,233 aneurysms. Multivariate analysis showed that previously ruptured aneurysms (odds ratio [OR] 3.182; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.851-5.470; p < 0.001), surgical clipping (OR 3.598; 95% CI 1.894-6.836; p < 0.001), and higher aspect ratio (OR 1.310; 95% CI 1.032-1.663; p = 0.024) were independent risk factors for IPR. Patients with IPR had significantly higher rates of unfavorable clinical outcomes (mRS ≥ 3) compared to those without (18.0% vs. 3.3%, p < 0.001). However, within the ruptured aneurysm subgroup, the rate of unfavorable outcomes did not differ significantly between IPR and non-IPR groups (22.7% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.594).
conclusionRuptured aneurysms, surgical clipping, and higher aspect ratio were independently associated with IPR. IPR significantly increased the risk of unfavorable clinical outcomes regardless of treatment approach, except in the subgroup of ruptured aneurysms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39283335What 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.