SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2020
Iron chelators for acute stroke.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- The therapeutic opportunities and pitfalls of using iron ion chelators to treat neurodegenerative diseases.FEBS letters · 2026Review
- Clinical implications of ferroptosis in critical illness: a narrative review.Journal of intensive care · 2026Review
- Emerging Therapeutic Strategies in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Enhancing Neurogenesis and Functional Recovery.MedComm · 2025Review
- Harnessing Mitochondrial Function for Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: Unlocking Antioxidant Power.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Traditional Chinese Medicine and Ferroptosis in Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Potential Therapeutic Approach.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Review
- Dynamic mechanisms and targeted interventions in cerebral ischemia-reperfusion injury: pathological cascade from ischemia to reperfusion and promising therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
- The Role of Iron-Chelating Therapy in Improving Neurological Outcome in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage: Evidence-Based Case Report.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Neonatal Arterial Ischaemic Stroke: Advances in Pathologic Neural Death, Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prognosis.Current neuropharmacology · 2022Review
- L-F001, a Multifunctional Fasudil-Lipoic Acid Dimer Prevents RSL3-Induced FerroptosisFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStroke is the second leading cause of death and a major cause of morbidity worldwide. Retrospective clinical and animal studies have demonstrated neuroprotective effects of iron chelators in people with haemorrhagic or ischaemic stroke. This is the first update of the original Cochrane Review published in 2012.
objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of iron-chelating drugs in people with acute stroke. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (2 September 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 9; 2 September 2019), MEDLINE Ovid (2 September 2019), Embase Ovid (2 September 2019), and Science Citation Index (2 September 2019). We also searched ongoing trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of iron chelators versus no iron chelators or placebo for the treatment of acute stroke, including subarachnoid haemorrhage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the search results. We obtained the full texts of potentially relevant studies and evaluated them for eligibility. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsTwo RCTs (333 participants) were eligible for inclusion; both compared the iron-chelating agent deferoxamine against placebo. Both studies evaluated participants with spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage. We assessed one study to have a low risk of bias; the other study had potential sources of bias. The limited and heterogeneous data did not allow for meta-analysis of the outcome parameters. The evidence suggests that administration of deferoxamine may result in little to no difference in deaths (8% in placebo vs 8% in deferoxamine at 180 days; 1 RCT, 291 participants; low-certainty evidence). These RCTs suggest that there may be little to no difference in good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score 0 to 2) between groups at 30, 90 and 180 days (placebo vs deferoxamine: 67% vs 57% at 30 days and 36% vs 45% at 180 days; 2 RCTs, 333 participants; low-certainty evidence). One RCT suggests that administration of deferoxamine may not increase the number of serious adverse events or deaths (placebo vs deferoxamine: 33% vs 27% at 180 days; risk ratio 0.81, 95 % confidence interval 0.57 to 1.16; 1 RCT, 291 participants; low-certainty evidence). No data were available on any deaths within the treatment period. Deferoxamine may result in little to no difference in the evolution of National Institute of Health Stroke Scale scores from baseline to 90 days (placebo vs deferoxamine: 13 to 4 vs 13 to 3; P = 0.37; 2 RCTs, 333 participants; low-certainty evidence). Deferoxamine may slightly reduce relative oedema surrounding intracerebral haemorrhage at 15 days (placebo vs deferoxamine: 1.91 vs 10.26; P = 0.042; 2 RCTs, 333 participants; low-certainty evidence). Neither study reported quality of life. AUTHORS'
conclusionsWe identified two eligible RCTs for assessment. We could not demonstrate any benefit for the use of iron chelators in spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage. The added value of iron-chelating therapy in people with ischaemic stroke or subarachnoid haemorrhage remains unknown.
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.