Observational studyScientific reports2025
Comparison of safety and efficacy between double LVIS and flow diverter for Blister-Like aneurysms: a multicenter retrospective study.
Observational study in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Safety and efficacy of flow diversion for blood blister aneurysms: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2026Pooled it
- Perforator-Aware Explainable Microsurgical Intelligence for Basilar Trunk Aneurysm Reconstruction: A Human-Centred Clinical AI Framework for Precision Neurovascular Surgery-A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using double overlapping LVIS and single Flow Diverter for the treatment of Blood Blister-like aneurysms (BBAs) in the internal carotid artery. In this retrospectively study, 88 patients with BBAs in the internal carotid artery who initially underwent treatment with either double LVIS or single Pipeline, with or without coiling, were recruited from four institutions between 2016 and 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was utilized to balance the confounding factors. The overall rate of procedural complications was 17.0%, with favorable clinical outcomes observed in 89.8% of cases and complete IA occlusion achieved in 89.6% of cases. Procedure-related complications were found to be significant predictors of unfavorable clinical outcomes, while incomplete aneurysm occlusion on immediate angiography was a significant predictor of incomplete occlusion during follow-up (p<0.05). Double LVIS and single FD treatment, with or without coiling, demonstrated comparable rates of procedural complications, aneurysm occlusion, and favorable clinical outcomes at follow-up, both before and after propensity score matching (p>0.05). Double LVIS treatment with coiling was determined to be a safe, effective, and feasible alternative option for the treatment of BBAs.
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.