SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2022
Endovascular thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke patients with prestroke disability (mRS ≥2): A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endovascular therapy in acute ischaemic stroke patients with prestroke dependency-an EVA-TRISP cohort study.European stroke journal · 2026Observational
- Impact of Severe Prestroke Disability on Outcomes After Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Multicenter Analysis.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Mechanical Thrombectomy in Prestroke Disability: Data From the Italian Endovascular Stroke Registry.Stroke · 2025Article
- External validation of clinical risk prediction score for elderly treated with endovascular thrombectomy.Journal of neurology · 2024Observational
- Endovascular Thrombectomy in Patients With Preexisting Disability: A Review.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Review
- Endovascular thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke and prestroke mRS 3: a multicenter IPTW analysis focused on functional preservation.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
- Impact of reperfusion on thrombectomy outcomes in patients with pre-stroke disability.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The effect of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke patients with prestroke disability (modified Rankin Scale score, mRS) ≥2) has not been well-studied. This study aimed to assess the safety and benefit of EVT in patients with prestroke disability. Methods: According to PRISMA guidelines, literature searching was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases, for a series of acute ischemic stroke patients with prestroke mRS ≥2 treated by EVT. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the rate of return to prestroke mRS and mortality at 3-month follow-up. Results: In total, 13 observational studies, with 2,625 patients, were analyzed. The rates of return to prestroke mRS in patients with prestroke mRS of 2-4 were 20% (120/588), 27% (218/827), and 31% (34/108), respectively. Patients with prestroke disability treated by EVT had a higher likelihood of return to prestroke mRS (relative risk, RR, 1.86; 95% CI 1.28-2.70) and a lower likelihood of mortality (RR 0.75; 95%CI 0.58-0.97) compared with patients with standard medical treatment. Successful recanalization (Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grade 2b-3) after EVT gave a higher likelihood of return to prestroke mRS (RR 2.04; 95% CI 1.17-3.55) and lower mortality (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.62-0.84) compared with unsuccessful reperfusion. Conclusions: Acute ischemic stroke patients with prestroke disability may benefit from EVT. Withholding EVT on the sole ground of prestroke disabilities may not be justified.
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.