ArticleBMJ open2022
Mechanical thrombectomy first versus direct angioplasty or stenting for the treatment of intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis-related large vessel occlusion: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMechanical thrombectomy (MT) using stent retrievers or a direct aspiration first-pass technique has proven to yield better results over intravenous thrombolysis in treating acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion (LVO). However, the treatment of intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis-related LVO remains unclear and has been a critical problem in daily clinical practice, as it can cause a relatively high failure rate for MT. Whether direct angioplasty and/or stenting is clinically feasible and shows advantage in reducing delay to revascularisation with better functional outcome compared with MT with rescue angioplasty and/or stenting remains unclear. This study seeks to provide direct and practical clinical evidence for clinicians. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The main databases of PubMed, the Cochrane library, Embase and Web of Science will be screened for related studies published after1 January 2015. Primary outcomes include successful recanalisation and 90-day favourable outcome. Secondary outcomes include puncture to revascularisation time, vascular complication (perforation, dissection and vasospasm), intracerebral haemorrhage, hospital-related complications and 90-day mortality. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be adopted to assess risk bias of observational studies. The ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No primary data of patients are needed. Therefore, ethics approval is unnecessary. The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021268061.
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.