ReviewClinical neuroradiology2015
Diagnosis and Treatment of Intracranial Stenoses.
Review in Clinical neuroradiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recanalization of atherosclerotic stenosis and occlusion of intracranial vertebrobasilar artery.IBRO neuroscience reports · 2025Review
- Quantification of intracranial arterial stenotic degree evaluated by high-resolution vessel wall imaging and time-of-flight MR angiography: reproducibility, and diagnostic agreement with DSA.European radiology · 2021Article
- Use of quantitative magnetic resonance angiography in patients with symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis who undergo stenting: Presentation of three cases.Journal of cerebrovascular and endovascular neurosurgery · 2021Article
- 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
- Endovascular treatment for symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2018Article
- Intracranial stenting for nilotinib treatment-associated cerebrovascular stenosis in chronic myeloid leukemia.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2017Article
- Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke is one of the most frequent and most significant vascular diseases. According to estimates, 16.9 million people suffered a stroke in 2010, and over one-third of the incidents were lethal. The risk of suffering a stroke due to intracranial stenosis is between 7 and 24%. As opposed to extracranial stenoses of the internal carotid artery, there is no standardized treatment concept for intracranial stenoses. At present, treatment with a low daily dose of 100 mg aspirin is recommended by the guidelines for intracranial stenoses to additionally prevent dose-dependent gastrointestinal side effects and bleeding complications. The WINGSPAN study showed stroke rates and mortality rates amounting to 4.5% after 30 days and 7.0% after 6 months. The Stenting versus Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis study is a randomized, multicenter study that compared endovascular stent treatment in patients with symptomatic arteriosclerotic intracranial stenoses with intensified drug therapy. After the inclusion of 451 of 764 study patients planned initially, study recruitment was terminated prematurely because the stroke rate or mortality rate within 30 days was 14.7% in the endovascular treatment group compared with 5.8% in the drug therapy group and 20% within 12 months compared with 12.2%. Quite recently the results of a second randomized study of intracranial stents were published in the Vitesse Intracranial Stent Study for Ischemic Stroke Therapy study. In an analysis published by Liebeskind et al. concerning the impact of collateral vessels on the stroke risk based on data from the Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease study, it was demonstrated that a sufficiently formed collateral network in patients with high-degree vascular constrictions (≥ 70%) plays a crucial role in the avoidance of strokes. If there is no system of collateral vessels or if it is insufficient, the stroke risk in the dependent vascular territory is six times higher. So far it has not yet been possible to conclusively answer the question of optimal treatment for intracranial stenoses. There is particularly need for action regarding the treatment of high-degree recurrent symptomatic stenoses, not only in light of the unfavorable prognosis but also within the scope of demographic change.
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.