ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2025
The Role and Reliability of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm Treatment Score in Decision-making in Surgical Indications for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms Based on the Results at a Japanese Single Center.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To clarify the role and reliability of unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score in the treatment indications of unruptured intracranial aneurysm for Japanese patients, we performed a retrospective comparative analysis of our actual decision-making and unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score judgment. The unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score was applied to each of 208 Japanese patients with diagnosis of unruptured intracranial aneurysm for a year. The patients included were classified into 4 groups by integrating actual decisions with the scoring of unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score. Of 94 patients treated, unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score recommended repair for 64 (68.1%, "appropriately treated") and observation for 5 (5.3%, "possible over-treated"). Among 114 patients under observation, unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score recommended repair for 19 (16.7%, "possible under-treated") and observation for 29 (25.4%, "appropriately conservative"). In the remaining 91 patients judged as "not definitive" by the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score, 66 (72.5%) were determined as conservative follow-up. From the perspective of the unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score, its sensitivity and specificity were 85.3% and 88.6%, respectively. Our findings suggest that in Japanese patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm, unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment score is a reliable tool for guiding treatment decisions for unexpertized clinicians; however, the final judgment should be made by a trained neurosurgeon, especially in cases categorized as not definitive.
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.