SynthesisNeuroradiology2025
Safety and efficacy of the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device in ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neuroradiology, 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.
- Woven Endobridge device for ruptured vs. unruptured aneurysms: insights from the WorldWideWEB study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Ruptured aneurysm of the middle cerebral artery with cerebral herniation treated with Woven EndoBridge via distal radial artery access: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of the Woven EndoBridge Device for Wide-Neck Bifurcation Intracranial Aneurysms: 1-Year Results of the W-EB DB Study.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Woven EndoBridge (WEB; Terumo) device has gained increasing recognition for treating ruptured intracranial aneurysms (RIAs) due to its ability to disrupt flow with a single implant, avoiding long-term dual antiplatelet therapy. Despite multiple studies, a comprehensive synthesis of recent evidence remains lacking. This study addresses this gap through a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the WEB device's safety and efficacy in RIA management.
methodsA systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane, and the Web of Science identified studies on WEB treatment for RIAs up to January 2025. Key outcomes included implantation success, rebleeding, occlusion, retreatment, good functional outcomes (mRS 0-2) at 90 days, morbidity, mortality, and complications. A single-arm proportion analysis was conducted under a random-effects model.
resultsTwenty-five studies with 1,065 patients (1,077 aneurysms) were included. The implantation success rate was 98.04%, and rebleeding occurred in 0.33% of cases. Adequate and complete occlusion at 12 months were 83.77% and 59.42%, respectively. Good functional outcomes at 90 days were 87.27%, with a retreatment rate of 7.54%. Procedure-related mortality and morbidity were 0.39% and 1.39%. The overall complication rate was 12.82%, with thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events in 4.55% and 1.05% of cases, respectively.
conclusionOur findings indicate that the WEB device is a safe and effective treatment for RIAs, offering high rates of adequate occlusion, good functional outcomes, and low complication rates. This evidence reaffirms the WEB device's safety and efficacy, supporting its wider adoption in clinical use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40522486What 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.