Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37161029›Full record

SynthesisScientific reports2023

Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting vs aggressive medical management on stroke or intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zhiyu Lai, Mingqiang Peng, Haoming He, Yingbin Li, Xiaoxin Bai, Jun Cai

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis.Cerebrovascular diseases extra · 2025
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zhiyu Lai *Diagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Mingqiang Peng *Diagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Haoming HeDiagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Yingbin LiDiagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Xiaoxin BaiDiagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China.
Jun CaiDiagnosis and Treatment Center of Encephalopathy, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510120, China. jcai_2015@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are currently two main treatment strategies mainly for high-risk patients: percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) and aggressive medical management (AMM). However, the choice between PTAS or AMM remains controversial for patients with stroke or intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS). The investigators searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane library databases. Randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing PTAS and AMM for patients with stroke or ICAS were selected. RevMan 5.3 was used to analyze the results and assess risk of bias. The primary endpoints are stroke and death within 30 days after enrollment, or ischemic stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days, and entire follow-up endpoints. The secondary outcomes were the disabling or fatal stroke, and incidence of death within 3 years. Four studies, 989 patients were included in this article. The AMM group was superior in the entire follow-up endpoint (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.40, 0.79). The AMM also better in primary endpoint within 30 days (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.17, 0.61). There was no significant difference beyond 30 days (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.63, 1.86). The remaining outcomes, such as stroke and death, were not significantly different (P > 0.05). This meta-analysis shows AMM is significantly more effective than PTAS in subjects with ICAS due to the high rate of periprocedural stroke (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.17, 0.61) and stroke during the entire follow-up (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.40, 0.79) associated with PTAS. Furthermore, PTAS offers no additional benefits over AMM beyond 30 days (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.63, 1.86).

Indexed as

Intracranial ArteriosclerosisIschemic StrokeStrokeAngioplastyConstriction, PathologicHumans

Identifiers

PMID37161029
PMCPMC10169842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.