SynthesisActa neurochirurgica2023
A systematic review of the Woven EndoBridge device-do findings in pre-clinical animal models compare to clinical results?
Synthesis in Acta neurochirurgica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Regulatory T cells in perioperative neurocognitive disorders: a systematic review with structured narrative synthesis from molecular mechanisms to clinical translation.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
- Enhancing thromboresistance of neurovascular nickel-titanium devices with responsive heparin hydrogel coatings.Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2025Article
- A Systematic Review of the Effect of Cystic Fibrosis Treatments on the Nasal Potential Difference Test in Animals and Humans.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
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
backgroundThe Woven Endobridge (WEB) is designed to treat intracranial wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms, preventing subarachnoid hemorrhage. The translational value of animal models used for WEB device testing is unknown. With this systematic review, we aim to identify the existing animal models used in testing the WEB device and compare the efficacy and safety outcomes to those of prospective clinical studies.
methodsThis study was funded by ZonMw: project number 114024133. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed and in EMBASE via the Ovid interface. The following exclusion criteria were used: 1) not an original full-length research paper, 2) not an in vivo animal study or a human study, 3) no WEB implantation, 4) if in humans: not a prospective study. The SYRCLE risk of bias tool (animal studies) and the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies (clinical studies) were used to assess risks of bias. A narrative synthesis was performed.
resultsSix animal studies and 17 clinical studies met the inclusion criteria. The rabbit elastase aneurysm model was the only animal model used to assess WEB device performance. Safety outcomes were never reported in animal studies. Efficacy outcomes were more heterogeneous in animal studies than in clinical studies, which could be due to limited external validity of the animal models in terms of aneurysm induction and dimensions. Both animal and clinical studies were predominantly single-arm studies, and were at unclear risk of several types of bias.
conclusionsThe rabbit elastase aneurysm model was the only pre-clinical animal model used to assess WEB device performance. Safety outcomes were not evaluated in animal studies and could therefore not be compared to clinical outcomes. Efficacy outcomes were more heterogeneous in animal studies than in clinical studies. Future research should focus on improving methodology and reporting in order to draw accurate conclusions on the performance of the WEB device.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.