ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Utilization of pipeline embolization device for treatment of ruptured complex intracranial aneurysms.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Use of the Pipeline embolization device (PED) for treatment of ruptured complex intracranial aneurysms (IAs) remains controversial due to higher thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications compared to balloon-assisted coiling. We present our experience using the PED for ruptured complex IAs and focus on the safety, effectiveness, and follow-up results. Methods: Consecutive 46 patients with ruptured complex IAs who had undergone PED deployment from January 2019 to December 2023 at our neurosurgical center were retrospectively enrolled. Patient demographics, aneurysm characteristics, procedural complications, clinical and angiographic follow-up outcomes were reviewed. Results: A total of 46 patients were analyzed with a mean age of 55.8 ± 13.4 years, including 30(65.2%) females. WFNS grades were I in 27 patients (58.7%), II in 10 (21.7%), III in 5 (10.9%), IV in 2 (4.3%), and V in 2 (4.3%). The ruptured aneurysms included 12 (26.1%) saccular, 23 (50.0%) blister-like, 10 (21.7%) dissecting, and 1(2.2%) fusiform. The average size of IAs was 4.3 ± 2.9 mm. PED deployment was technically successful in all patients and adjunctive coiling was performed in 44(95.7%) patients. The rate of procedural-related complications was 13.0% (6/46), including 2 hemorrhagic and 4 ischemic complications. One patient died of rerupture of aneurysm (1/46, 2.2%), and 95.3% of patients (41/43) had favorable outcomes at the 90-day follow-up. Among 40 available cases, complete aneurysm occlusion was obtained in 38 cases (95.0%, 38/40) at a mean follow-up of 7.5 months. Conclusion: Treatment of ruptured complex IAs with the PED was associated with acceptable complication rates, high complete occlusion rates, and good clinical outcomes. Therefore, PED may be a safe and effective option for ruptured IAs that were difficult to treat by conventional endovascular and surgical approaches. However, larger and comparative studies with long-term follow-up are needed to confirm this result.
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.