ReviewBrain & spine2024
An overview of decision-making in cerebrovascular treatment strategies: Part II - Ruptured aneurysms.
Review in Brain & spine, 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.
- Efficacy and safety of endovascular coiling compared to microsurgical clipping in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.Journal of neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Contemporary indications and outcomes of open surgical cerebral aneurysm management in the endovascular era.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Decision-making for the treatment of ruptured aneurysms is an intricate process, which involves several factors. There has been a rapid advancement in endovascular, but also in the surgical treating field of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, with a growing body of evidence for either treatment technique. Research question: As there is a wide variety of treatment possibilities, it can be hard to understand the intricacies which lie behind the decision-making process for a given aneurysm. Materials and methods: An overview of the most relevant literature in decision-making on ruptured intracranial aneurysms is given. Results: Different decision-altering factors were identified, which can be divided into information from the general evidence, to influential factors such as the patient's age, initial presenting status, and aneurysmal factors such as size, morphology and aneurysmal location. Discussion and conclusion: This review provides an evidence-based overview of the most pertinent literature on these different aspects of decision-making in ruptured aneurysm cases and provides some recommendations after each of these segments. As always, all different aspects of the patient and aneurysmal factors should be taken into consideration before coming to a conclusion, as to obtain the best possible result for an individual patient.
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.