Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25501448›Full record

SynthesisJournal of neurointerventional surgery2016

Stroke recurrence rates among patients with symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenoses: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ahmad R Abuzinadah, Mohammed H Alanazy, Mohammed A Almekhlafi, Yanjune Duan, Haifeng Zhu, Mikael Mazighi, Helmi L Lutsep, Tyrone Donnon, Michael D Hill

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of neurointerventional surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Use of Embolic Protection Devices in Peripheral Interventions.Interventional cardiology (London, England) · 2017
    Article
  19. Review
  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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Ahmad R AbuzinadahInternal Medicine Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, KSA.
Mohammed H AlanazyInternal Medicine Department, King Saud University, Riyadh, KSA.
Mohammed A AlmekhlafiInternal Medicine Department, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, KSA.
Yanjune DuanUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Haifeng ZhuUniversity of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Mikael MazighiDepartment of Neurology Lariboisiere Hospital Laboratory of Vascular Translational Science Paris 7 and Sorbonne Paris Cité Universities.
Helmi L LutsepOregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Tyrone DonnonDepartment of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Michael D HillDepartments of Clinical Neurosciences, Medicine, Radiology, and Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Hotchkiss Brain Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
University of Calgary · CAKing Abdulaziz University · SAAllen Institute for Brain Science · USKing Saud University · SAOregon Health & Science University · USUniversité Paris Cité · FR

Funding

Heartland Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchUL1TR000001 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI BAROHN, RICHARD J. · 2012 to 2015
$13.0M
HEARTLAND INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL AND TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCHUL1RR033179 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI BAROHN, RICHARD J. · 2011 to 2011
$3.2M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000001NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000001NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR033179NCRR NIH HHS UL1RR033179
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA recent randomized trial of patients with primarily anterior circulation intracranial artery stenosis showed that intensive medical therapy was superior to intracranial stenting in preventing recurrent stroke. The rate of stroke recurrence or death in symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis with medical therapy alone may be especially high, and rates compared with endovascular therapy need further study.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the rates of stroke recurrence or death (the primary outcome) in symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar stenosis with medical or endovascular treatment over a minimum follow-up period of 6 months. We included all studies in any language indexed in MEDLINE or EMBASE, supplemented by bibliography searches and by contacting the authors. The secondary endpoints were stroke recurrence, and basilar artery and vertebral artery stroke recurrence rates.

results23 studies (592 medical treatment patients and 480 endovascular treatment patients) were included. The risk of combined stroke recurrence or death was 14.8 per 100 person-years (95% CI 9.5 to 20.1) in the medical group compared with 8.9 per 100 person-years (95% CI 6.9 to 11.0) in the endovascular group. The incidence rate ratio was 1.3 (95% CI 1.0 to 1.7). The stroke recurrence rate was 9.6 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.1 to 14.1) in the medical group compared with 7.2 per 100 person-years (95% CI 5.5 to 9.0) in the endovascular group.

conclusionsOur results showed that the risk of stroke recurrence or death or the risk of stroke recurrence alone was comparable between the medical and endovascular therapy groups. A small preventive effect of endovascular therapy may exist, particularly if the 30 day postprocedural risk is reduced.

Indexed as

Cohort StudiesHumansMortalityRecurrenceStrokeVertebrobasilar InsufficiencyAtherosclerosisStenosisStentStroke

Identifiers

PMID25501448
PMCPMC6310226
OpenAlexW2111070121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.