ArticleThe British journal of radiology2025
Safety and efficacy of aneurysms treated with endovascular devices (The SEATED Study).
Article in The British journal of radiology, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo create a nationwide consortium to gather all the data related to advanced devices used for aneurysm treatment and conduct pragmatic real-world studies despite the variations among all centres. The strength of this study will be in pooling data of the less commonly used recent devices where there is less evidence. The study will be prospective and retrospective where the initial recruitment figure is expected to be around 5000 patients.
methodsTo assess how endovascular techniques vary among different UK centres, we illustrate the results of initial surveys that were sent to those centres across the United Kingdom using a single device, the pipeline embolization device with vantage technology (PEDV).
resultsAlthough the centres were using the same device, the antiplatelet protocol varied from one centre to another as well as follow-up protocols according to the local experience, patient clinical status or even according to the adjuncts uses (e.g., adjunct coiling).
conclusionsThe illustrated results show that although the centres were using the same device, the antiplatelet protocol varied from one centre to another. Also, follow-up protocols vary from one centre to another according to the local experience, patient clinical status or even according to the adjuncts used (e.g., adjunct coiling). This exemplar serves to illustrate that a nationwide consortium can pool and analyse data of any recent endovascular device. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Obtaining nationwide data regarding safety, efficacy as well as risk factors for aneurysm recurrence when using recent devices. This study will add valuable data regarding the less commonly used recent devices where there is less evidence.
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.