ReviewAsian journal of neurosurgery
Aspiration Thrombectomy for Posterior Circulation Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Asian journal of neurosurgery. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing functional recovery in posterior circulation stroke following mechanical thrombectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ neurology open · 2026Article
- First-pass efficacy with simplicity: Macrowire-only direct aspiration technique in posterior circulation mechanical thrombectomy.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciences · 2025Article
- Safety and efficacy of aspiration thrombectomy versus stent retriever thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2022Article
- Which is the most effective rescue treatment after the failure of mechanical thrombectomy for acute basilar artery occlusion?Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to analyze the efficacy of aspiration thrombectomy for large vessel occlusion of the posterior circulation, with an emphasis on comparison with stent retriever thrombectomy.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to analyze the outcomes of aspiration thrombectomy for acute posterior circulation stroke. For those studies that included data for both aspiration and stent-retriever thrombectomy, we additionally performed a second meta-analysis comparing their outcomes against each other.
resultsA total of 17 articles were included. For the primary outcomes, the weighted pooled rate of mortality was 26.71% (95% confidence interval [CI] 19.35%-34.71%), modified Ranking Score (mRS) 0-2 at 3 months was 36.71 (95% CI 32.02%-41.52%), and successful recanalization 89.26% (95% CI 83.12%-94.31%). Primary stent retriever thrombectomy was inferior to primary aspiration thrombectomy for the outcomes of successful recanalization (odds ratio [OR] 0.57, 95% CI 0.36-0.91, LIMITATIONS: The included studies were observational in nature. There was unresolved heterogeneity in some of the outcomes.
conclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference seen for the primary outcomes of mortality and favorable outcome (mRS score 0-2) at 3 months. While superior rates of successful recanalization, complete recanalization, faster procedural time, and improved safety profile for primary aspiration thrombectomy were seen compared to primary stent retriever thrombectomy, this did not translate into superior clinical outcomes.
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.