Trial reportStroke2015
Outcome in patients previously on antithrombotic therapy in the SAMMPRIS trial: subgroup analysis.
Trial report in Stroke, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00576693 (Stenting vs. Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis), which is not on this 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.
Stenting vs. Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rigorous anaesthesia management protocol for patients with intracranial arterial stenosis: a prospective controlled-cohort study.BMJ open · 2016Trial
- The 2023 Taiwan Stroke Society Guidelines for the management of patients with intracranial atherosclerotic disease.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
- Rescue therapy after thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion due to underlying atherosclerosis: review of literature.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Review
- Correlation of the characteristics of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic plaques with stroke types and risk of stroke recurrence: a cohort study.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Intracranial Stenting; the Current Landscape.Neurointervention · 2021Article
- Early Acute Ischemic Stroke Management for Pharmacists.Hospital pharmacy · 2020Article
- Risk of Recurrence of Symptomatic Intracranial Atherosclerosis in Posterior Circulation Seen to Be Higher Than That in Anterior Circulation in Long-Term Follow-Up.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Stroke Caused by Atherosclerosis of the Major Intracranial Arteries.Circulation research · 2017Review
- Management of Symptomatic Intracranial Stenosis.Current cardiology reports · 2016Review
- China Angioplasty and Stenting for Symptomatic Intracranial Severe Stenosis (CASSISS): A new, prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial in China.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2015Article
- Intracranial stenosis: impact of randomized trials on treatment preferences of US neurologists and neurointerventionists.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2014Article
- The challenge of stroke prevention with intracranial arterial stenosis.Current cardiology reports · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeStenting has been used as a rescue therapy in patients with intracranial arterial stenosis and a transient ischemic attack or stroke when on antithrombotic therapy (AT). We determined whether the stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis (SAMMPRIS) trial supported this approach by comparing the treatments within subgroups of patients whose qualifying event (QE) occurred on versus off of AT.
methodsThe primary outcome, 30-day stroke and death and later strokes in the territory of the qualifying artery, was compared between (1) percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting plus aggressive medical therapy (PTAS) versus aggressive medical management therapy alone (AMM) for patients whose QE occurred on versus off AT and between (2) patients whose QE occurred on versus off AT separately for the treatment groups.
resultsAmong the 284/451 (63%) patients who had their QE on AT, the 2-year primary end point rates were 15.6% for those randomized to AMM (n=140) and 21.6% for PTAS (n=144; P=0.043, log-rank test). In the 167 patients not on AT, the 2-year primary end point rates were 11.6% for AMM (n=87) and 18.8% for PTAS (n=80; P=0.31, log-rank test). Within both treatment groups, there was no difference in the time to the primary end point between patients who were on or off AT (AMM, P=0.96; PTAS, P=0.52; log-rank test).
conclusionsSAMMPRIS results indicate that the benefit of AMM over PTAS is similar in patients on versus off AT at the QE and that failure of AT is not a predictor of increased risk of a primary end point. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00576693.
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.