Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31559486›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in neurology2019

Treatment of Extracranial Arterial Dissection: the Roles of Antiplatelet Agents, Anticoagulants, and Stenting.

Zakhar Serkin, Scott Le, Cathy Sila

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Selective endovascular treatment of cervical arterial dissection using quantitative magnetic resonance angiography.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2024
    Article
  4. Cervical Artery Dissections: Etiopathogenesis and Management.Vascular health and risk management · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zakhar SerkinNeurological Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Avenue/HAN 5040, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Scott LeNeurological Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Avenue/HAN 5040, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. ScottMayhughLe@gmail.com.
Cathy SilaNeurological Institute, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, 11100 Euclid Avenue/HAN 5040, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Case Western Reserve University · USUniversity Hospitals of Cleveland · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewCervicocephalic arterial dissection (CeAD) is the most commonly identified cause of stroke in young healthy individuals. The management of acute ischemic stroke due to the diagnosed or suspected CeAD is well established and is appropriate for thrombolysis. There is a substantial risk of stroke recurrence in the early post-stroke period. The optimum method of stroke prevention in the subacute period remains debatable. In our review, we focused on the management of recurrent stroke in CeAD, the choice of various antithrombotic agents for stroke risk reduction with regard to specific pathogenetic mechanisms of dissections, and the utility of endovascular therapy. RECENT

findingsRecent studies suggest that various pathogenetic types of CeAD based on radiologic characteristics may be associated with greater risk of thrombogenicity, especially in the early post-stroke period. The use of anticoagulants has been shown to be effective in the eliminating microembolic signals (MES) detected by transcranial Doppler (TCD). The only randomized trial that compared combinations of antiplatelet agents and vitamin K-agonist anticoagulation did not find significant difference in risk of stroke, major bleeding, or mortality. The benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy cannot be excluded. Limited data on the use of direct oral anticoagulant agents (DOAC) is currently available. Endovascular therapy with stenting, while potentially effective, may pose significant risk of complications. Therefore, it needs to be carefully considered on a case-to-case basis. The recurrence of ischemic stroke in patients with CeAD is overall rare. No significant difference in treatment with various antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents has been shown in randomized trials. Only a few studies were based on radiological characteristics of dissections. An ongoing randomized trial is investigating the role of MES and the efficacy of antiplatelet versus anticoagulation agents. The role of DOAC agents has yet to be determined in clinical trials. Stenting in CeAD is an effective revascularization technique and may be considered in selected patients. However, current data is only based on low evidence level findings from small studies, lacking longitudinal outcomes and prognosis.

Indexed as

AnticoagulationAntiplateletCarotid dissectionCervical artery dissectionEndovascular stentingVertebral dissection

Identifiers

PMID31559486
OpenAlexW2975073390

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.