Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26739964›Full record

ReviewTranslational stroke research2016

Extending the Time Window for Endovascular and Pharmacological Reperfusion.

Nils Henninger, Marc Fisher

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Translational stroke research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Roles of Nitric Oxide in Brain Ischemia and Reperfusion.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. New insights into targeting mitochondria in ischemic injury.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2021
    Review
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

2 authors.

Nils HenningerDepartment of Neurology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Marc FisherDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. mfisher5@bidmc.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharmacological and device-induced reperfusion therapies have demonstrated increasingly positive outcomes regarding both reperfusion efficacy and 90-day functional outcomes after acute ischemic stroke. However, presently, only a minority of patients are eligible for these treatments. Less than 10 % of all ischemic stroke patients receive intravenous thrombolysis in most centers and it has been projected that only approximately 7-15 % of ischemic stroke patients are eligible for acute endovascular intervention. Making these effective therapies safely available to a much larger number of patients is critical for expanding the benefits of acute ischemic stroke treatment. In this article, we summarize the key results from the clinical trials, challenges, and exciting novel opportunities to increase patient eligibility for these therapies as well as for better outcomes for stroke patients.

Indexed as

AnimalsEndovascular ProceduresHumansReperfusion InjuryStrokeTime FactorsTissue Plasminogen ActivatorTreatment OutcomeTissue Plasminogen ActivatorAnimal modelingEndovascularImagingIschemic strokeNeuroprotectionRecanalizationReperfusion injuryThrombolysisTime windowTissue-type plasminogen activator

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.