SynthesisPloS one2018
Mechanical endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: An indirect treatment comparison between Solitaire and Penumbra thrombectomy devices.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rehabilitation in Animal Models of Stroke.Physical therapy research · 2023Review
- Erythrocyte Fraction in Thrombi Is Increased with Serum Iron by Influencing Fibrin Networks via Oxidative Stress.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2021Article
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
backgroundRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared mechanical endovascular therapy (MET) in addition to intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IVtPA) to IVtPA alone for the management of acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Direct comparative studies between individual METs are not available. In lieu of head-to-head randomized control trials, we performed an adjusted indirect treatment comparison (ITC) meta-analysis to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of different METs, Solitaire+IVtPA and Penumbra+IVtPA in AIS patients. METHODS AND
findingsWe searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Embase from January 1, 2005 through April 1, 2017 for RCTs in AIS patients, comparing a single MET+IVtPA to IVtPA alone and reporting shift in ordinal modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days. Secondary endpoints included 90 day mortality and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). Endpoints were pooled using traditional random effects meta-analysis methods, producing odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Adjusted ITCs using pooled estimates were then performed. Three studies (SWIFT PRIME, EXTEND-IA, THERAPY) were included; two evaluating the Solitaire stent retriever and one the Penumbra system. Traditional meta-analysis demonstrated that each MET+IVtPA resulted in increased odds of improving ordinal mRS score vs. IVtPA alone, but did not alter the odds of death or sICH. Adjusted ITC showed no significant difference between the METs for any outcome.
conclusionNo significant difference in efficacy or safety between the Solitaire and Penumbra devices was observed.
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.