ReviewJournal of stroke2015
Evolution of Endovascular Therapy in Acute Stroke: Implications of Device Development.
Review in Journal of stroke, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic management of ischemic stroke.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Review
- Selecting the Appropriate First-Line Strategy Based on Hyperdense Vessel Sign in Acute Ischemic Stroke Increases First Pass Recanalization: A Tertiary Center Experience.The Indian journal of radiology & imaging · 2021Article
- Susceptibility Vessel Sign in the ASTER Trial: Higher Recanalization Rate and More Favourable Clinical Outcome after First Line Stent Retriever Compared to Contact Aspiration.Journal of stroke · 2018Article
- Vectorized nanodelivery systems for ischemic stroke: a concept and a need.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2017Review
- Clinical features and biological markers of lung cancer-associated stroke.The Journal of international medical research · 2016Article
- Cerebral infarct volume measurements to improve patient selection for endovascular treatment.Medicine · 2016Observational
- Choosing a Hyperacute Stroke Imaging Protocol for Proper Patient Selection and Time Efficient Endovascular Treatment: Lessons from Recent Trials.Journal of stroke · 2015Review
- Endovascular Therapy: A Standard Treatment?Journal of stroke · 2015Article
- A call for neurologists to take up stroke intervention.Annals of Indian Academy of NeurologyReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intravenous thrombolysis is an effective treatment for acute ischaemic stroke. However, vascular recanalization rates remain poor especially in the setting of large artery occlusion. On the other hand, endovascular intra-arterial therapy addresses this issue with superior recanalization rates compared with intravenous thrombolysis. Although previous randomized controlled studies of intra-arterial therapy failed to demonstrate superiority, the failings may be attributed to a combination of inferior intra-arterial devices and suboptimal selection criteria. The recent results of several randomized controlled trials have demonstrated significantly improved outcomes, underpinning the advantage of newer intra-arterial devices and superior recanalization rates, leading to renewed interest in establishing intra-arterial therapy as the gold standard for acute ischaemic stroke. The aim of this review is to outline the history and development of different intra-arterial devices and future directions in research.
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.