ReviewNeurosurgical review2011
Recanalization therapy for acute ischemic stroke, part 2: mechanical intra-arterial technologies.
Review in Neurosurgical review, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence for high translational potential of mesenchymal stromal cell therapy to improve recovery from ischemic stroke.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2013Review
- Perlecan domain V therapy for stroke: a beacon of hope?ACS chemical neuroscience · 2013Review
- Beyond the time window of intravenous thrombolysis: standing by or by stenting?Interventional neurology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke therapy has been revolutionized in the past two decades with the widespread implementation of chemical thrombolysis for acute stroke. However, chemical thrombolysis continues to be limited in its efficacy secondary to relatively short time windows and a high associated risk of hemorrhage. In an attempt to minimize hemorrhagic complications and extend the available therapeutic window, mechanical devices designed specifically for thrombus removal, clot obliteration, and arterial revascularization have experienced a recent surge in development and utilization. As such, chemical thrombolytics now represent only one of many options in acute stroke therapy. These new mechanical devices have extended the potential treatment window and now provide alternatives to patients who do not respond to conventional intravenous thrombolysis. This review will discuss the development of these devices, supporting literature, and the individual strengths that each engenders towards a life-saving therapy for stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21107630What 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.