Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32421159›Full record

Trial reportJAMA neurology2020

Effect of Endovascular Treatment With Medical Management vs Standard Care on Severe Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: The TO-ACT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Jonathan M Coutinho, Susanna M Zuurbier, Marie-Germaine Bousser, Xunming Ji, Patricia Canhão, Yvo B Roos, Isabelle Crassard, Ana Paiva Nunes, Maarten Uyttenboogaart, Jian Chen and 10 more

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 106 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
10.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT01204333 phase2 / phase3terminatednot on this map

Thrombolysis or Anticoagulation for Cerebral Venous Thrombosis (TOACT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorJan Stam, MD, PhDRan2011 to 2017Enrolled67ConditionsSinus Thrombosis, IntracranialArmsEndovascular thrombolysis, Heparin
NCT05291585 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Safety and Efficacy of the Dedicated Venous Sinus Thrombectomy Stent for Endovascular Treatment of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis.

TypeinterventionalSponsorJi Xunming,MD,PhDRan2022 to 2023Enrolled60ConditionsCerebral Venous Sinus ThrombosisArmsthe dedicated venous sinus thrombectomy stent, balloon catheter thrombectomy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 210 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Safety and efficacy of endovascular thrombolysis in patients with acute cerebral venous sinus thrombosis: A systematic review.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Computed Tomography Findings of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Case Report.Journal of education & teaching in emergency medicine · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Cerebral venous thrombosis: Current management, recent advances and future directions.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

20 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Jonathan M CoutinhoDepartment of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Susanna M ZuurbierDepartment of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Marie-Germaine BousserDepartment of Neurology, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France.
Xunming JiDepartment of Interventional Radiology, XuanWu Hospital, Beijing, China.
Patricia CanhãoServiço de Neurologia, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Hospital Santa Maria/Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, Department of Neurosciences and Mental Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Yvo B RoosDepartment of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Isabelle CrassardDepartment of Neurology, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France.
Ana Paiva NunesDepartment of Neurology, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal.
Maarten UyttenboogaartDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Jian ChenDepartment of Interventional Radiology, XuanWu Hospital, Beijing, China.
Bart J EmmerDepartment of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Stefan D RoosendaalDepartment of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Emmanuel HoudartDepartment of Neuroradiology, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France.
Jim A ReekersDepartment of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
René van den BergDepartment of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Rob J de HaanClinical Research Unit, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Charles B MajoieDepartment of Radiology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
José M FerroServiço de Neurologia, Instituto de Medicina Molecular, Hospital Santa Maria/Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, Department of Neurosciences and Mental Health, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Jan StamDepartment of Neurology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
TO-ACT investigators
Amsterdam University Medical Centers · NLHôpital Lariboisière · FRBeijing Xuanwu Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital · CNHospital de Santa Maria · PTCentro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central · PTUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: To date, only uncontrolled studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT), leading to the lack of recommendations on EVT for CVT. Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of EVT in patients with a severe form of CVT. Design, Setting, and Participants: TO-ACT (Thrombolysis or Anticoagulation for Cerebral Venous Thrombosis) was a multicenter, open-label, blinded end point, randomized clinical trial conducted in 8 hospitals in 3 countries (the Netherlands, China, and Portugal). Patients were recruited from September 2011 to October 2016, and follow-up began in March 2012 and was completed in December 2017. Adult patients with radiologically confirmed CVT who had at least 1 risk factor for a poor outcome (mental status disorder, coma state, intracerebral hemorrhage, or thrombosis of the deep venous system) were included. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle from March 2018 to February 2019. The trial was halted after the first interim analysis for reasons of futility. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either EVT with standard medical care (intervention group) or guideline-based standard medical care only (control group). The EVT consisted of mechanical thrombectomy, local intrasinus application of alteplase or urokinase, or a combination of both strategies. Patients in the intervention group underwent EVT as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was the proportion of patients with a good outcome at 12 months (recovered without a disability; modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score of 0-1). Secondary end points were the proportion of patients with an mRS score of 0 to 1 at 6 months and an mRS score of 0 to 2 at 6 and 12 months, outcome on the mRS across the ordinal continuum at 12 months, recanalization rate, and surgical interventions in relation to CVT. Safety end points included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Results: Of the 67 patients enrolled and randomized, 33 (49%) were randomized to the intervention group and 34 (51%) were randomized to the control group. Patients in the intervention group vs those in the control group were slightly older (median [interquartile range (IQR)] age, 43 [33-50] years vs 38 [23-48] years) and comprised fewer women (23 women [70%] vs 27 women [79%]). The median (IQR) baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 12 (7-20) in the EVT group and 12 (5-20) in the standard care group. At the 12-month follow-up, 22 intervention patients (67%) had an mRS score of 0 to 1 compared with 23 control patients (68%) (relative risk ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.38). Mortality was not statistically significantly higher in the EVT group (12% [n = 4] vs 3% [n = 1]; P = .20). The frequency of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was not statistically significantly lower in the intervention group (3% [n = 1] vs 9% [n = 3]; P = .61). Conclusions and Relevance: The TO-ACT trial showed that EVT with standard medical care did not appear to improve functional outcome of patients with CVT. Given the small sample size, the possibility exists that future studies will demonstrate better recovery rates after EVT for this patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01204333.

Indexed as

Mechanical ThrombolysisOutcome Assessment, Health CareAdultAnticoagulantsCerebral VeinsCombined Modality TherapyFemaleFibrinolytic AgentsFollow-Up StudiesHumansIntracranial ThrombosisMaleMiddle AgedSeverity of Illness IndexSingle-Blind MethodTissue Plasminogen ActivatorAnticoagulantsFibrinolytic AgentsTissue Plasminogen ActivatorUrokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator

Identifiers

PMID32421159
PMCPMC7235912
OpenAlexW3024300379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.