ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2025
Midterm outcomes and costs of Pipeline embolization device alone versus Atlas stent-assisted coiling for unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms: a propensity score matched comparative analysis.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nomogram for predicting in-stent stenosis after pipeline embolization device treatment in patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysm: a multicenter model development and validation study.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Stent-Assisted Coiling vs. Flow Diversion in Unruptured Anterior Circulation Aneurysms: A Single-Center Cohort Study.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Dual-volume reconstruction technology in the detection and classification of recurrent aneurysms following intracranial aneurysm embolization.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endovascular treatment has achieved great progress over the past few decades, providing multiple options for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms (IAs). In the present era of flow diverters (FDs), the optimum endovascular management for unruptured IAs amenable to both stent-assisted coiling (SAC) and FDs remains to be determined. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the midterm outcomes and costs of Pipeline embolization device (PED) alone versus Atlas SAC for the treatment of unruptured saccular anterior circulation aneurysms. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study in which we studied consecutive unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms treated with PED alone or Atlas SAC at our institution. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to control for potential differences. Results: A total of 731 patients with 739 aneurysms were included: 299 patients with 302 aneurysms received PED treatment and 432 patients with 437 aneurysms received Atlas SAC treatment. The two groups differed at baseline. After PSM, two comparable groups of 192 aneurysms each were obtained. The PED alone group had shorter procedure times (97.65±33.53 Conclusions: This study showed similar midterm outcome with PED alone and Atlas SAC for the treatment of unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms. Atlas SAC required a longer procedure time, and PED alone increased hospital costs. However, patients who underwent PED treatment were more likely to develop ISS during follow-up. In addition, the retreatment rate was higher in the Atlas group than in the PED group.
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.