SynthesisJournal of neurology2021
Direct admission versus secondary transfer for acute ischemic stroke patients treated with thrombectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategies to reduce delays in delivering mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke - an umbrella review.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Pooled it
- Transferring neurointerventionalists saves time compared with interhospital transfer of stroke patients for endovascular thrombectomy: a collaborative pooled analysis of 1001 patients (EVEREST).Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2023Observational
- Primary results of mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: The K-NET registry in the Japanese metropolitan area.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2023Observational
- Mechanical Thrombectomy in the Late Presentation of Anterior Circulation Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: A Guideline From the Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology Guidelines and Practice Standards Committee.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
- To bridge or not to bridge: summary of the new evidence in endovascular stroke treatment.Stroke and vascular neurology · 2022Article
- Impact of interhospital transfer vs. direct admission on acute ischemic stroke patients: A subset analysis of the COMPLETE registry.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
- Influence of interhospital transfer on endovascular thrombectomy outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients: an analysis of the TREAT-AIS registry.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeRandomized controlled trials have demonstrated that mechanical thrombectomy (MT) could provide more benefit than standard medical care for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients due to emergent large vessel occlusion. However, most primary stroke centers (PSCs) are unable to perform MT, and MT can only be performed in comprehensive stroke centers (CSCs) with on-site interventional neuroradiologic services. Therefore, there is an ongoing debate regarding whether patients with suspected AIS should be directly admitted to CSCs or secondarily transferred to CSCs from PSCs. This meta-analysis was aimed to investigate the two transportation paradigms of direct admission and secondary transfer, which one could provide more benefit for AIS patients treated with MT.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis through searching PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library database up to March 2020. Primary outcomes are as follows: symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH) within 7 days; favorable functional outcome at 3 months; mortality in hospital; mortality at 3 months; and successful recanalization rate.
resultsOur pooled results showed that patients directly admitted to CSCs had higher chances of achieving a favorable functional outcome at 3 months than those secondarily transferred to CSCs (OR = 1.26; 95% CI, 1.12-1.42; P < 0.001). In addition, no significant difference was found between the two transportation paradigms in the rate of sICH (OR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.62-1.18; P = 0.35), mortality in hospital (OR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.51-1.39; P = 0.51), mortality at 3 months (OR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.85-1.21; P = 0.91), and successful recanalization (OR = 1.03; 95% CI, 0.88-1.20; P = 0.74). However, in the 100% bridging thrombolysis usage rate subgroup, our subgroup analysis indicated that no difference was found in any outcome between the two transportation paradigms.
conclusionPatients with AIS directly admitted to CSCs for MT may be a feasible transportation paradigm for AIS patients. However, more large-scale randomized prospective trials are required to further investigate this issue.
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.