Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38360580›Full record

SynthesisBMC neurology2024

Personalized decision-making for aneurysm treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: development and validation of a clinical prediction tool.

Jordi de Winkel, Bob Roozenbeek, Simone A Dijkland, Ruben Dammers, Pieter-Jan van Doormaal, Mathieu van der Jagt, David van Klaveren, Diederik W J Dippel, Hester F Lingsma

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

9 authors.

Jordi de WinkelDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 40 Doctor Molewaterplein, P.O. Box 2405, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands. j.dewinkel@erasmusmc.nl.
Bob RoozenbeekDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 40 Doctor Molewaterplein, P.O. Box 2405, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Simone A DijklandDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 40 Doctor Molewaterplein, P.O. Box 2405, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Ruben DammersDepartment of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Pieter-Jan van DoormaalDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Mathieu van der JagtDepartment of Intensive Care Adults, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
David van KlaverenDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Diederik W J DippelDepartment of Neurology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 40 Doctor Molewaterplein, P.O. Box 2405, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Hester F LingsmaDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage suitable for endovascular coiling and neurosurgical clip-reconstruction, the aneurysm treatment decision-making process could be improved by considering heterogeneity of treatment effect and durability of treatment. We aimed to develop and validate a tool to predict individualized treatment benefit of endovascular coiling compared to neurosurgical clip-reconstruction.

methodsWe used randomized data (International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial, n = 2143) to develop models to predict 2-month functional outcome and to predict time-to-rebleed-or-retreatment. We modeled for heterogeneity of treatment effect by adding interaction terms of treatment with prespecified predictors and with baseline risk of the outcome. We predicted outcome with both treatments and calculated absolute treatment benefit. We described the patient characteristics of patients with ≥ 5% point difference in the predicted probability of favorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Score 0-2) and of no rebleed or retreatment within 10 years. Model performance was expressed with the c-statistic and calibration plots. We performed bootstrapping and leave-one-cluster-out cross-validation and pooled cluster-specific c-statistics with random effects meta-analysis.

resultsThe pooled c-statistics were 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.75) for the prediction of 2-month favorable functional outcome and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63-0.71) for prediction of no rebleed or retreatment within 10 years. We found no significant interaction between predictors and treatment. The average predicted benefit in favorable functional outcome was 6% (95% CI: 3-10%) in favor of coiling, but 11% (95% CI: 9-13%) for no rebleed or retreatment in favor of clip-reconstruction. 134 patients (6%), young and in favorable clinical condition, had negligible functional outcome benefit of coiling but had a ≥ 5% point benefit of clip-reconstruction in terms of durability of treatment.

conclusionsWe show that young patients in favorable clinical condition and without extensive vasospasm have a negligible benefit in functional outcome of endovascular coiling - compared to neurosurgical clip-reconstruction - while at the same time having a substantially lower probability of retreatment or rebleeding from neurosurgical clip-reconstruction - compared to endovascular coiling. The SHARP prediction tool ( https://sharpmodels.shinyapps.io/sharpmodels/ ) could support and incentivize a multidisciplinary discussion about aneurysm treatment decision-making by providing individualized treatment benefit estimates.

Indexed as

Aneurysm, RupturedEmbolization, TherapeuticEndovascular ProceduresIntracranial AneurysmSubarachnoid HemorrhageHumansTreatment OutcomeIntracranial aneurysmPersonalized decision makingPrognosisSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Identifiers

PMID38360580
PMCPMC10868110

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.