Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17287234›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2007

Imaging of vertebral artery stenosis: a systematic review.

S Khan, G C Cloud, S Kerry, H S Markus

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudySystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 170 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A study of otolith function in patients with orthostatic dizziness.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S KhanSt George's University of London, Cranmer Terrace, London SW17 0RE, UK.
G C Cloud
S Kerry
H S Markus
St George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposePosterior circulation stroke accounts for 20% of ischaemic strokes. Recent data suggest that the early stroke recurrence risk is high and comparable with carotid artery disease. Vertebral artery stenosis accounts for approximately 20% of posterior circulation stroke, and with endovascular treatment available accurate diagnostic imaging is important. We performed a systematic literature review to validate the accuracy of the non-invasive imaging techniques Duplex ultrasound (DUS), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and computed tomographic angiography (CTA) in detecting severe vertebral artery stenosis, with intra-arterial angiography (IAA) as the reference standard.

methodsWe identified studies that used non-invasive imaging and IAA as the reference standard to determine vertebral artery stenosis and provided adequate data to calculate sensitivity and specificity. We analysed the quality of these studies, looked for evidence of heterogeneity and performed subgroup analysis for different degrees of stenosis.

results11 studies categorised stenosis into 50-99%. The sensitivity of CTA (single study) and pooled sensitivities of contrast enhanced MRA (CE-MRA) and colour duplex were 100% (95% CI 15.8 to 100), 93.9% (79.8 to 99.3) and 70.2% (54.2 to 83.3), respectively. The specificities for CTA, CE-MRA and colour duplex were 95.2% (83.8 to 99.4), 94.8% (91.1 to 97.3) and 97.7% (95.2 to 99.1). However, specificities for CE-MRA and colour duplex demonstrated significant heterogeneity (p = 0.003 and p = 0.002, respectively).

conclusionsCE-MRA and possibly CTA may be more sensitive in diagnosing vertebral artery stenosis than DUS. However, data are limited and further high quality studies comparing DUS, MRA and CTA with IAA are required.

Indexed as

Cerebral AngiographyMagnetic Resonance AngiographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonography, Doppler, DuplexContrast MediaHumansImage EnhancementSensitivity and SpecificityVertebrobasilar InsufficiencyContrast Media

Identifiers

PMID17287234
PMCPMC2117584
OpenAlexW2123959588

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.