Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41397448›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2025

Comparison of flow diverter devices and endovascular coiling to treat intracranial aneurysms with an incorporated branch: A retrospective cohort study.

Dadong Ding, Chao Wang, Da Wu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Dadong DingDepartment of Neurosurgery, Yixing People's Hospital, China.
Chao WangDepartment of Interventional Neuroradiology, Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, China.
Da WuDepartment of Neurosurgery, Yixing People's Hospital, China.ORCID 0009-0002-3522-3346

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of aneurysms with an incorporated branch treated using traditional endovascular coiling or a flow diverter device.MethodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted at Yixing People's Hospital from January 2015 to December 2023. The final analysis included 63 aneurysms treated with a pipeline embolization device (with or without coils) and 69 treated with endovascular coiling (with or without traditional stents).ResultsOverall, 26 aneurysms (41.3%) in the pipeline embolization device group and 44 (63.8%) in the coiling group achieved complete or near complete occlusion (

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresIntracranial AneurysmAdultAgedCerebral AngiographyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesStentsTreatment OutcomeAneurysmcoil embolizationincorporated branchpipelinepipeline embolization device

Identifiers

PMID41397448
PMCPMC12705972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.