Trial reportBMJ open2022
Cost-effective analysis of mechanical thrombectomy alone in the treatment of acute ischaemic stroke: a Markov modelling study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness of Thrombectomy With or Without Alteplase in Large Vessel Occlusion Stroke: A Meta-Analysis Considering Time-to-Treatment.Neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of endovascular treatment for acute ischemic stroke in China: evidence from Shandong Peninsula.Health economics review · 2024Article
- Article
- Endovascular treatment for basilar artery occlusion: a cost-effectiveness analysis based on a meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
- Economic evaluation of stent retrievers in basilar artery occlusion: An analysis from Chinese healthcare system perspective.PloS one · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveRecently, a randomised controlled trial (DIRECT-MT) demonstrated that mechanical thrombectomy (MT) was non-inferior to MT with intravenous alteplase as to the functional outcomes. This study aims to investigate whether MT alone is cost-effective compared with MT with alteplase in China.
methodsA Markov decision analytic model was built from the Chinese healthcare perspective using a lifetime horizon. Probabilities, costs and outcomes data were obtained from the DIRECT-MT trial and other most recent/comprehensive literature. Base case calculation was conducted to compare the costs and effectiveness between MT alone and MT with alteplase. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.
resultsMT alone had a lower cost and higher effectiveness compared with MT with alteplase. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated that, over a lifetime horizon, MT alone had a 99.5% probability of being cost-effective under the willingness-to-pay threshold of 1× gross domestic product per capita in China based on data obtained from the DIRECT-MT trial. These results remained robust under one-way sensitivity analysis.
conclusionsMT alone was cost-effective compared with MT with alteplase in China. However, cautions are needed to extend this conclusion to regions outside of China.
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.