ReviewInterventional neurology2012
Beyond the time window of intravenous thrombolysis: standing by or by stenting?
Review in Interventional neurology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Benserazide is neuroprotective and improves functional recovery after experimental ischemic stroke by altering the immune response.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Internal fibrinolysis of fibrin clots is driven by pore expansion.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Fibrinolysis: an illustrated review.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023Review
- Effects of clot contraction on clot degradation: A mathematical and experimental approach.Biophysical journal · 2022Article
- Microscale structural changes of individual fibrin fibers during fibrinolysis.Acta biomaterialia · 2022Article
- Mesenchymal stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke: Novel insight into the crosstalk with immune cells.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Review
- Peripheral Th17/Treg imbalance in elderly patients with ischemic stroke.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2018Article
- Reperfusion therapy in acute ischemic stroke: dawn of a new era?BMC neurology · 2018Review
- Immunomodulation after ischemic stroke: potential mechanisms and implications for therapy.Critical care (London, England) · 2016Review
- In vivo tracking of human adipose-derived stem cells labeled with ferumoxytol in rats with middle cerebral artery occlusion by magnetic resonance imaging.Neural regeneration research · 2015Article
- Cell based therapies for ischemic stroke: from basic science to bedside.Progress in neurobiology · 2014Review
- The paradox role of regulatory T cells in ischemic stroke.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous administration of tissue plasminogen activator within 4.5 h of symptom onset is presently the 'golden rule' for treating acute ischemic stroke. However, many patients miss the time window and others reject this treatment due to a long list of contraindications. Mechanical embolectomy has recently progressed as a potential alternative for treating patients beyond the time window for IV thrombolysis. In this paper, recent progress in mechanical embolectomy, angioplasty, and stenting in acute stroke is reviewed. Despite worries concerning the long-term clinical outcomes and increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage, favorable clinical outcomes may be achieved after mechanical embolectomy in carefully selected patients even 4.5 h after stroke onset. Potential steps should be prepared and attempted in these patients whose opportunity for recovery will elapse in a flash.
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.