ArticleAnatomical science international2025
Classification of the extracranial middle meningeal artery: a human dry skull, dissection and 3D CTA study.
Article in Anatomical science international, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Unexpected treatment failures can occur during middle meningeal artery embolization (MMAE) in the treatment of chronic subdural hematoma cases. This study aimed to classify variations in the anatomy of the extracranial MMA (exMMA) to improve MMAE. Five heads from body donors, 300 dry skulls, and 162 head and neck CT angiography (CTA) images were used to evaluate the overall features of the exMMA. Body donors dissection were incorporated to comprehensive exMMA representation. The distal features of the exMMA were determined by evaluating the outer osseous grooves of the foramen spinosum of the skulls. Measurements of the exMMA were performed using CTA. The angles between the maxillary artery and the exMMA were 109.5° ± 32.5° (left) and 117.1° ± 34.3° (right) (p < 0.05). The angle between the exMMA and the skull base was greater on the left side (79.24° ± 4.21°, p = 0.0017). The diameters of the exMMA were 1.45 ± 0.12 mm (left) and 1.44 ± 0.13 mm (right) (p = 0.82). Multiple types of accessorial foramen spinosum provided the paths for the accessorial MMA. In the new classification, five types were identified. Type A was the most common (73.15%) and represented an easily accessible MMAE type. This was followed by type C (25.62%, difficult to accessible), type D (18.83%, very difficult to accessible), type B (1.23%, fairly accessible), and type E (0.17%, inaccessible). Varying levels of interventional difficulty occur within the exMMAs classification. Careful preoperative evaluations should be performed before MMAE to determine the type of exMMA and potential interventional difficulty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41343000What 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.