Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
LetterLETTER

Meta-Analysis as a Symptom: The Example of Flow Diverters

E. Houdart
American Journal of Neuroradiology July 2020, 41 (7) E51; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A6594
E. Houdart
1Service de NeuroradiologieHôpital LariboisièreParis, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for E. Houdart
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

The principle of a meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of a treatment by combining the results of several studies. This method increases the statistical power to test certain hypotheses, especially when several randomized controlled trials are each too small to provide an answer or have provided contradictory conclusions.

Because we have very few randomized trials in interventional neuroradiology, our meta-analyses most often collect data of uncontrolled case series. A meta-analysis then makes sense when the target pathology is rare, with a limited number of cases reported in each publication. However, in this case, a single meta-analysis is sufficient, even if it may need to be updated sometimes.

The excessive use of multiple meta-analyses for the same medical problem is a symptom: the hope that the next one will provide better results than the previous one. Any neuroradiologist can consult PubMed and enter the term, object of his or her research, followed by “AND meta-analysis” and compare the number of responses obtained. Between February 2013 and January 2020, 19 meta-analyses, often redundant, have been published concerning the treatment of cerebral aneurysms by flow diverters. It is at this point that it would become possible to envisage a meta-analysis of meta-analyses!

I know that not all cerebral aneurysms are the same and that it may be necessary to distinguish those of the carotid from those of the vertebrobasilar circulation, to separately examine large and small aneurysms, those of the anterior communicating artery and those of the middle cerebral artery, those treatments for which one antiplatelet has been prescribed rather than another, and so forth. However, all these remarks also apply to coil treatment, and there have been only 2 published meta-analyses on that topic in the 27 years that they have been in clinical use. Why is that? When a treatment has convinced a discipline of its efficacy and relative safety, meta-analyses are not necessary. There is no meta-analysis concerning usefulness of antibiotic treatment in pulmonary tuberculosis.

This overabundance of meta-analyses expresses the desire to convince physicians and patients of the benefits of this implant. Quantity makes quality. Most meta-analyses (as well as most case series) on flow diversion report a cumulative morbidity/mortality rate of 10% or so, as if this was the normal price to pay for “otherwise untreatable” aneurysms. The argument that flow diversion should fill a therapeutic void is not supported by the number of units used between 2 interventional neuroradiologist centers that treat roughly the same number of aneurysms per year. The regulatory status of implants allows them to be used in indications different from those for which they were initially presented to the health authorities (at least in Europe). Thus, large and giant aneurysms of the carotid siphon, the initial indication for flow diverters, are now only an excuse to extend their use in the treatment of small or even very small aneurysms in multiple other locations, and to “accept” the 10% complication rate without balancing this risk with the one of other management options, including observation. The apparent aim of multiplying meta-analyses may finally be to replace the unquestionable methodologic evaluation, ie, the randomized controlled trial.

The financial crisis to which our insurance systems are subject will probably force health authorities to no longer offer reimbursement for expensive devices if they have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation. While a waiting that, we can bet that we will still have the opportunity to read a new meta-analysis about flow diverters in the near future.

  • © 2020 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 41 (7)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 41, Issue 7
1 Jul 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Meta-Analysis as a Symptom: The Example of Flow Diverters
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Meta-Analysis as a Symptom: The Example of Flow Diverters
E. Houdart
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jul 2020, 41 (7) E51; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6594

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Meta-Analysis as a Symptom: The Example of Flow Diverters
E. Houdart
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jul 2020, 41 (7) E51; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A6594
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Commentary about a 20th meta-analysis
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Fair Performance of CT in Diagnosing Unilateral Vocal Fold Paralysis
  • Reply:
  • Regarding “Altered Blood Flow in the Ophthalmic and Internal Carotid Arteries in Patients with Age-Related Macular Degeneration Measured Using Noncontrast MR Angiography at 7T”
Show more LETTERS

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2022 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2023 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire