Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16159065›Full record

ReviewNeurocritical care2005

Submaximal angioplasty and staged stenting for severe posterior circulation intracranial stenosis: a technique in evolution.

Elad I Levy, Jay U Howington, Johnathan A Engh, Ricardo A Hanel, Naveh Levy, Stanley H Kim, Kevin J Gibbons, Lee R Guterman, L Nelson Hopkins

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neurocritical care, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elad I LevyDepartment of Neurosurgery and Toshiba Stroke Research Center, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Kaleida Health/Millard Gates Hospital, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, New York 14209, USA.
Jay U Howington
Johnathan A Engh
Ricardo A Hanel
Naveh Levy
Stanley H Kim
Kevin J Gibbons
Lee R Guterman
L Nelson Hopkins
University at Buffalo, State University of New York · USToshiba (United States) · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSevere medically refractory intracranial stenosis portends a grave prognosis. Recent advances in stent technology have enabled clinicians to treat these lesions. Evidence in the coronary literature suggests that stenting without predilation angioplasty is as safe and effective as stenting immediately preceded by predilation angioplasty for the treatment of severely stenotic lesions. Because of marked differences in vessel histology and differences in the sensitivity of the cerebral and coronary vascular beds to embolic insult, direct stenting of severe intracranial stenoses may be more prone to neurological complications than a conventional or staged stenting procedure.

methodsWe reviewed our clinical experience with conventional, direct, and staged stenting for high-grade stenoses involving the posterior intracranial circulation. We also reviewed the literature and experimental data supporting the rationale for staged stenting.

resultsIn our experience, no permanent neurological morbidity was identified in four patients treated with a staged approach. In contrast, one of three patients with conventional stenting of the basilar artery and two of four patients treated with direct basilar stenting had permanent neurological sequelae.

conclusionFor patients with high-grade posterior circulation intracranial stenoses involving the perforator-rich zones of the basilar artery, staged stenting may reduce procedure-related morbidity. A staged approach allows for plaque stabilization resulting from post-angioplasty fibrosis, which may protect patients from "snow-plowing," embolic shower of debris, or dissection. Further clinical, in vivo, and histological investigation is warranted.

Indexed as

Cerebral RevascularizationStentsAngioplasty, BalloonHumansIntracranial ArteriosclerosisVertebrobasilar Insufficiency

Identifiers

PMID16159065
OpenAlexW2065407131

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.