ReviewStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
Evaluating Animal Models of Arteriovenous Malformation and Intracerebral Aneurysm: A Mechanistic Approach.
Review in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining biomaterial-driven design principles for bioabsorbable flow diverters: current state and perspectives.Bioactive materials · 2027Review
- Decoding brain arteriovenous malformations: from genetic insights to modeling the vascular maze.Acta neuropathologica communications · 2026Review
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
Arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) and intracranial aneurysms contribute to a high degree of morbidity and mortality due to the risk of intracranial hemorrhage observed in each of these cerebrovascular disorders. Due to the morbidity present in each condition, preclinical modeling of AVMs and intracerebral aneurysms is essential for advancing treatment options. A multitude of techniques and animal models have been described to model both AVM and intracranial aneurysm. In the present study, we sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the different models used to recapitulate AVM and intracranial aneurysm, highlighting advantages and disadvantages of each model. We conducted a comprehensive literature search for all preclinical animal models of AVM and intracerebral aneurysm. The studies included in the literature review were obtained from PubMed and included original studies, reviews, and systematic reviews. In this review, we highlight various animal models of AVM and intracranial aneurysm through the use of genetic models as well as surgical models. An overview of each model is thoroughly described and advantages and disadvantages of each model are outlined. Through the evaluation of current literature, the best models for AVM and aneurysm depend on the goal of the underlying study. Overall, we recommend using rodents and swine for modeling AVM and aneurysm as these animal species provide versatility, reliability, and accessibility for vascular research. Additionally, these species best recapitulate human AVM and aneurysm.
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.