ReviewJournal of central nervous system disease2022
Clinical outcomes following reperfusion therapy in acute ischemic stroke patients with infective endocarditis: a systematic review.
Review in Journal of central nervous system disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Subtype identification of clinical and thrombus imaging features in acute ischemic stroke: using clustering analysis and principal component analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Native Infective Endocarditis: A State-of-the-Art-Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Introducing the Futile Recanalization Prediction Score (FRPS): A Novel Approach to Predict and Mitigate Ineffective Recanalization after Endovascular Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke.Neurology international · 2024Article
- Endovascular Treatment of Large Vessel Occlusion Strokes Caused by Infective Endocarditis: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Case Presentation.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- A Cryptogenic Stroke Associated With Infective Endocarditis and Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome: Case Report and Literature Review.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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a common and fatal complication of infective endocarditis (IE); however, there is a lack of understanding regarding treatment efficacy. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in IE patients experiencing AIS. Objectives: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review investigating the outcomes of AIS in IE patients receiving IVT and/or EVT as a treatment method and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of these methods of reperfusion therapy. Design: A systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. Data Sources and Methods: The EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched for literature published between 2005 and 2021 investigating outcomes of reperfusion therapy post-AIS in IE and non-IE patients. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the overall frequency of clinical outcomes, and groupwise comparisons were performed using Fisher's exact test to assess the significance of groupwise differences. Results: Three studies were finally included in the systematic review. A total of 13.5% of IE patients compared to 37% of non-IE patients achieved a good functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale score≤ 2) ( Conclusion: AIS patients with IE, treated with IVT, EVT, or a combination of the two, experience worse clinical and safety outcomes than non-IE patients. EVT yielded better functional outcomes, albeit with higher postreperfusion ICH rates, than IVT.
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.