SynthesisNeurosurgical review2026
Shifting the paradigm in intracranial aneurysm detection with deep learning: A diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis and meta-regression.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2026. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence for Cerebral Aneurysm Management: Integrating Imaging, Hemodynamics, and Clinical Decision Support.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence in neurovascular surgery: advancing diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes.Frontiers in surgery · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background deep learning has emerged as a promising approach for detecting intracranial aneurysms across multiple imaging modalities. To clarify its diagnostic value, a systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken. Methods the review adhered to PRISMA standards and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251151933). Eligible studies included original peer-reviewed investigations reporting the diagnostic accuracy of deep learning systems, alone or in combination with radiologists, for the detection of intracranial aneurysms on CTA, MRA, or DSA. Both ruptured and unruptured lesions were considered. Data extraction followed a standardized protocol, and risk of bias was appraised using the QUADAS framework. Pooled estimates were generated under random-effects models, with heterogeneity explored through subgroup analyses and meta-regression. Results thirty-four studies comprising 49,748 patients and 6,751 aneurysms met inclusion criteria. The pooled mean age was 57.5 ± 1.9 years, and the average aneurysm size was 5.0 ± 0.6 mm. The sROC model demonstrated a sensitivity of 89% [95%CI: 86%–92%], specificity of 89% [95%CI: 84%–93%], and an AUC of 0.95 [95%CI: 0.93–0.96]. The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 69 [95%CI: 37–129], with LR + 8.5 and LR– 0.12. Subgroup analysis showed the highest accuracy when deep learning was combined with radiologists (sensitivity 92%, specificity 95%, DOR 250) and when DSA was used as the imaging modality (sensitivity 91%, specificity 93%, DOR 153). Meta-regression identified patient age as a significant covariate for specificity (p = 0.007). Conclusion deep learning demonstrates high accuracy for aneurysm detection, particularly when integrated with radiologists and trained on DSA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41781568What 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.