ArticleFrontiers in neurology2022
Endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke with a fully radiopaque retriever: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04995757 (Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Open Label, Single Blinded, All China, Multi-Center, Registration Trial of the Thrombectomy System for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke.), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Open Label, Single Blinded, All China, Multi-Center, Registration Trial of the Thrombectomy System for the Treatment of Acute Ischemic Stroke.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Early National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Versus 90-Day Modified Rankin Scale Outcomes in Acute Ischemic Stroke Trials: A Systematic Review and Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Pooled it
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The Neurohawk retriever is a new fully radiopaque retriever. A randomized controlled non-inferiority trial was conducted to compare the Neurohawk and the Solitaire FR in terms of safety and efficacy. In order to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endovascular treatment in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) caused by intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) larger vessel occlusion (LVO), a sub-analysis was performed. Methods: Acute ischemic stroke patients aged 18-80 years with LVO in the anterior circulation were randomly assigned to undergo thrombectomy with either the Neurohawk or the Solitaire FR. The primary efficacy endpoint was successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b-3) rate by the allocated retriever. A relevant non-inferiority margin was 12.5%. Safety outcomes were symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and all-cause mortality within 90 days. Secondary endpoints included first-pass effect (FPE), modified FPE, and favorable outcomes at 90 days. In subgroup analysis, the patients were divided into the ICAD group and non-ICAD group according to etiology, and baseline characteristics, angiographic, and clinical outcomes were compared. Results: A total of 232 patients were involved in this analysis (115 patients in the Neurohawk group and 117 in the Solitaire group). The rates of successful reperfusion with the allocated retriever were 88.70% in the Neurohawk group and 90.60% in the Solitaire group (95%CI of the difference, -9.74% to 5.94%; Conclusion: The Neurohawk retriever is non-inferior to the Solitaire FR in the mechanical thrombectomy of large vessel occlusion-acute ischemic stroke (LVO-AIS). The sub-analysis suggested that endovascular treatment including thrombectomy with the retriever and essential rescue angioplasty is effective and safe in AIS patients with intracranial atherosclerotic disease-larger vessel occlusion (ICAD-LVO). Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04995757, number: NCT04995757.
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.