ArticleScientific reports2025
Silent magnetic resonance angiography diagnostic value of intracranial unruptured aneurysms.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Silent magnetic resonance angiography (S-MRA) is primarily utilized to assess the blood flow in aneurysms and parent vessels of treated intracranial aneurysms. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic value of S-MRA and three-dimensional time of flight (3D-TOF) MRA for unruptured intracranial aneurysms. We included patients diagnosed with unruptured intracranial aneurysms using digital subtraction angiography (DSA) who subsequently underwent S-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA. Two independent neuroimaging and neurointerventional doctors evaluated the DSA images and measured aneurysm dimensions. Using DSA results as the gold standard, we determined the sensitivity and specificity of S-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA, as well as their accuracy in measuring aneurysm size and identifying aneurysms with daughter sacs. We detected a total of 41 intracranial aneurysms (in 37 patients) on both S-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA, with both techniques achieving a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. For aneurysm height, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.977 (P < 0.001) between S-MRA and DSA, and 0.908 (P < 0.001) between 3D-TOF MRA and DSA. For neck width, the ICC was 0.663 (P < 0.001) between S-MRA and DSA, and 0.563 (P < 0.001) between 3D-TOF MRA and DSA. In terms of daughter aneurysm detection, 3D-TOF MRA Sensitivity 40%; specificity 92%: positive predictive value 100%; S-MRA sensitivity 60%; specificity 89%; positive predictive value 42%. In conclusion, S-MRA and 3D-TOF MRA did not significantly differ in aneurysm detection ability. For the detection of aneurysm with dauthger sacs indicators, the sensitivity is also higher.
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.