SynthesisJournal of neurology2020
Endovascular therapy versus intravenous thrombolysis in cervical artery dissection-related ischemic stroke: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Intravenous Thrombolysis in Patients with Acute Cerebral Infarction.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Carotid artery dissection recanalization: imaging modalities, influencing factors, and therapeutic perspectives.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Repurposing the KTranslational stroke research · 2024Article
- Recanalization Therapies for Large Vessel Occlusion Due to Cervical Artery Dissection: A Cohort Study of the EVA-TRISP Collaboration.Journal of stroke · 2023Article
- Safety and outcome of mechanical thrombectomy in ischaemic stroke related to carotid artery dissection.Journal of neurology · 2022Article
- Stroke Prevention in Cervical Artery Dissection.Current cardiology reports · 2021Review
- Mechanical thrombectomy in patients with cervical artery dissection and stroke in the anterior or posterior circulation - a multicenter analysis from the German Stroke Registry.Neurological research and practice · 2021Article
- Intravenous Thrombolysis Benefits Mild Stroke Patients With Large-Artery Atherosclerosis but No Tandem Steno-Occlusion.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- The Value of ADAMTS13 in Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Receiving Thrombolysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of our meta-analysis is to evaluate the endovascular therapy (EVT) in patients with cervical artery dissection (CAD)-related acute ischemic stroke (AIS) by comparing its efficacy and safety with the ones of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT).
methodsA systematic search on EVT to CAD-related ischemic stroke is performed. The meta-analysis models are applied to calculate either the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) or pooled proportions with 95% CI of favorable functional outcome (mRS = 0-2), excellent functional outcome (mRS = 0-1), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (SICH), mortality and recurrent stroke between EVT and IVT in CAD-related stroke. The differences between the two treatment groups are analyzed by the pooled odds ratio value and Chi-squared test.
resultsA total of 190 patients given EVT and 139 IVT-alone patients are included. By comparing EVT alone and IVT alone, patients treated with EVT alone are more likely to experience favorable outcomes than those treated with IVT alone (71.2% vs 53.4%). Besides, there is no significant difference in excellent functional outcome, SICH, mortality and recurrent stroke between the EVT-alone and IVT-alone groups (all P > 0.05). Towards general EVT (EVT with or without IVT), the outcomes are not significantly different from those of IVT alone except for a higher mortality rate (10.2% vs 3.2%).
conclusionBased on our findings, EVT is considered to be more efficacious than IVT for CAD-related AIS patients. Although EVT alone tends to be safe and promising, its safety needs to be further evaluated, particularly for EVT separating from IVT therapy.
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.