ReviewCurrent opinion in neurology2012
Current diagnosis and management of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic disease.
Review in Current opinion in neurology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cerebral blood flow evaluation of intensive rosuvastatin therapy in stroke/transient ischemic attack patients with intracranial arterial atherosclerotic stenosis study: Rationale and design.Brain and behavior · 2017Trial
- Ischemic Conditioning Is Safe and Effective for Octo- and Nonagenarians in Stroke Prevention and Treatment.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2015Trial
- Review
- Pathological haemodynamics of a middle cerebral artery stenosis validated by computational fluid dynamics.BMJ case reports · 2022Article
- Intracranial atherosclerotic disease.Neurobiology of disease · 2019Review
- Proteomic analysis and comparison of intra‑ and extracranial cerebral atherosclerosis responses to hyperlipidemia in rabbits.Molecular medicine reports · 2017Article
- Treatment and imaging of intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: current perspectives and future directions.Brain and behavior · 2016Review
- Patients with single distal MCA perfusion lesions have a high rate of good outcome with or without reperfusion.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2014Article
- Article
- Final Results of Cilostazol-Aspirin Therapy against Recurrent Stroke with Intracranial Artery Stenosis (CATHARSIS).Cerebrovascular diseases extraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewIntracranial atherosclerotic disease (IAD) is likely the most common cause of stroke world-wide and is associated with a very high risk of recurrence. It results in cerebral ischemia due to a variety of mechanisms, including artery-to-artery embolism, hemodynamic failure, and occlusion of penetrating arteries. New imaging modalities focused on physiological consequences of IAD have become available and recent treatment trials have been completed. RECENT
findingsWe review the traditional imaging modalities, emphasizing the advantages and limitations of each method, and discuss the novel physiological approaches that interrogate physiological process to indicate specific mechanisms of ischemia. These allow deeper understanding of the pathophysiological processes that underlie IAD-related ischemia. The key findings of recent therapeutic trials are reviewed, including the landmark randomized studies showing advantage of antiplatelet agents and risk factor modification, and a significant risk of complications with endovascular approaches. SUMMARY: Current evidence argues for aggressive medical management and suggests caution with interventional treatments. We propose that mechanistic information will further refine the risk assessment of patients with IAD to offer targeted therapy.
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.