ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2015
Safety and Efficacy Analyses of Angioplasty and Stenting for Severe Intracranial Arterial Stenosis: A Single-Center Retrospective Study in China.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe value of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) in the context of aggressive medical treatment for severe intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS) is under debate. This study compared the effects of PTAS and aggressive medical treatment in patients with severe ICAS and transient ischemic attack or stroke. MATERIAL AND
methodsA retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients with severe ICAS were assigned to a PTAS group or aggressive medical treatment group, according to the angiographic features of the stenotic lesions. The primary outcome was defined as stroke or death within 30 days or cerebral ischemia occurring ipsilaterally to the qualifying artery beyond 30 days.
resultsWe included 220 patients: 48 in the PTAS group and 172 in the medical group. The median follow-up was 32 months. PTAS was not associated with an increased incidence of the primary outcomes (10/42 vs. 39/172, p=0.96) or increased risks of the secondary outcomes of stroke, cardiovascular events, major bleeding, or mortality. The results of log-rank tests did not support a significant difference in event-free survival as a primary outcome between the 2 groups (chi-square=0.07, p=0.79). Moreover, although not significantly greater, the mean survival of patients in the PTAS group appeared to be better than that among patients in the medical group, as indicated by the curve for cumulative survival.
conclusionsA suitable PTAS procedure is safe for patients with severe ICAS, and no significant differences in incidence of recurrent stroke or death were found between PTAS and aggressive medication treatment.
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.