A Retrospective Study Comparison Between Stenting and Standardized Medical Treatment for Intracranial Vertebrobasilar Stenosis in a Real-World Chinese Cohort.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) in patients with symptomatic intracranial vertebrobasilar artery stenosis (IVBS).Stroke and vascular neurology · 2025
   Pooled it
2. One-year outcomes of the drug eluting stent in the treatment of severe vertebral artery ostium stenosis: single-center experience.Neurosurgical review · 2025
   Article
3. Correlation between vascular stenosis severity and dizziness symptoms and neurological prognosis in elderly patients with acute ischemic stroke.Frontiers in neurology · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as