ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2008
Endovascular therapy of symptomatic intracranial stenosis in patients with impaired regional cerebral blood flow or failure of medical therapy.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Stent angioplasty of intracranial stenosis: single center experience of 54 cases.Clinical neuroradiology · 2012Trial
- Primary angioplasty for symptomatic atherosclerotic middle cerebral artery stenosis.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2014Article
- Treatment of intracranial atherosclerotic arterial stenoses with a balloon-expandable cobalt chromium stent (Coroflex Blue): procedural safety, efficacy, and midterm patency.Neuroradiology · 2010Article
- Indications and applications of arterial stents for stroke prevention in atherosclerotic intracranial stenosis.Current cardiology reports · 2010Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeSymptomatic intracranial stenoses have a high risk for a recurrent stroke if treated medically. Although angioplasty and stent placement are proposed treatment options, data on longer-term outcome are limited. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed all endovascular procedures on symptomatic intracranial stenosis at our institution from January 1998 to December 2005. We retrospectively assigned patients to group A (symptoms despite antithrombotic therapy) or group B (impaired regional cerebral blood flow [rCBF]). Primary outcome events were periprocedural major complications or recurrent ischemic strokes in the territory of the treated artery. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to calculate survival probabilities.
resultsThe procedural technical success rate was 92% (35/38) with periprocedural major complications in 4 cases (10.5%; group A [8.3%, 2/24], group B [14.3%, 2/14]). Median (range) follow-up for the 33 patients with technically successful procedures was 21 (0-72) months. Recurrent ischemic strokes occurred in 15% (3/20) of patients in group A and 0% (0/13) of patients in group B. Overall, there were 21% (7/33) primary outcome events (group A [25%, 5/20], group B [15%, 2/13]). There was a nonsignificant trend for better longer-term survival free of a major complication or recurrent stroke in patients with impaired rCBF compared with patients who were refractory to medical therapy treatment (Kaplan-Meier estimate 0.85 [SE 0.10] vs 0.72 [SE 0.11] at 2 years, respectively).
conclusionInterventional treatment of symptomatic intracranial stenosis carries significant risk for complications and recurrent stroke in high-risk patients. The observation that patients with impaired rCBF may have greater longer-term benefit than medically refractory deserves further study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.