Comparison of Clipping Via Keyhole Versus Traditional Approaches and Coiling for Ruptured Aneurysms (NCT05049564) | Clinical Trial Compass
CompletedNot Applicable
Comparison of Clipping Via Keyhole Versus Traditional Approaches and Coiling for Ruptured Aneurysms
150 participantsStarted 2013-01-01
Plain-language summary
Endovascular coiling has become a strategy of choice of intracranial aneurysms due to its minimally invasiveness. However, there has few prospective randomized controlled studies on the comparison of therapeutic effect between endovascular coiling and microsurgical clipping, especially the latter via keyhole approaches, which has been widely used in recent years. Based on the data of a single center, a randomized controlled study was conducted on patients with ruptured anterior circulation aneurysms suitable for both endovascular and extravascular treatment, including endovascular coiling, microsurgical clipping via conventional craniotomy and keyhole approaches, in order to compare the efficacy of the above strategies and provide more objective basis for treatment selection for operators.
Who can participate
Sex
ALL
See this in plain English?
AI-rewrites the medical criteria so a patient or caregiver can understand them. Always confirm with the trial site.
Inclusion Criteria:
* Single intracranial anterior circulation aneurysm diagnosed by CTA or DSA
* CT showed that subarachnoid hemorrhage originated from the rupture of the aneurysm and was confirmed during operation
* No indication of decompressive craniectomy (Hunt-Hess grade ≤ 4, Glasgow Coma Scale ≥ 7, no brain herniation; CT showed midline displacement \< 5mm)
* The aneurysm is suitable for both endovascular treatment and microsurgical clipping
Exclusion Criteria:
* The patients and their families did not agree to join the study
* Patients with unruptured anterior circulation aneurysms
* Patients with posterior circulation aneurysms
* Patients with multiple intracranial aneurysms
* Those who cannot receive treatment due to serious concomitant diseases
Questions worth asking your doctor
Bring these to your next appointment. They're a starting point for a shared conversation — not a sign you qualify or a recommendation to enrol.
1Based on my diagnosis and history, is this trial worth exploring for me — or is there a standard treatment we should try first?
2What does this trial's phase tell us about how much is already known about its safety and benefit?
3What would taking part actually involve for me — visits, tests, time, and travel?
4What are the known and possible risks or side effects I should weigh, and how would they be monitored?
5If this trial isn't the right fit, what other options or trials would you suggest I look into?
Generated to help you prepare — always confirm anything about your own eligibility and care with the study team and your doctor.
Questions for the trial coordinator
The trial coordinator is the person who runs the study day to day. These cover the practical side — logistics, costs, and what taking part would actually mean for your life. The study team confirms whether you meet the criteria; these are questions to ask, not a sign you qualify.
1What does taking part actually involve week to week — how many visits, where, and how long does each one take?
2What costs are covered by the study, and what might I have to pay for myself, including travel, parking, or time off work?
3What happens during screening, and what happens if the study team confirms I don't meet the criteria after those tests?
4Who pays for the scans, blood work, and other tests the trial requires — the study, my insurance, or me?
5How will being in the trial affect my regular care, and will my own doctor stay informed and involved?
6Can I leave the trial at any point if I change my mind, and what would happen to my care if I do?
A starting point for the conversation — always confirm anything about your own eligibility, costs, and care with the study team and your doctor.