ArticleBMJ open2023
Stenting versus medical therapy alone for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis: protocol for a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Stenosis Degree on Outcomes of Stent Placement versus Medical Treatment Alone for Symptomatic Intracranial Stenosis: A Pooled Individual Patient Data Analysis.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIntracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) is a common cause of stroke worldwide. However, whether the treatment options for symptomatic ICAS is stent placement or medical therapy alone is still controversial. At present, three multicentre randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been published, but their research designs are also slightly different and the conclusions are not completely consistent. Therefore, we plan to conduct a systematic review and individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials to ascertain safety and efficacy of stenting versus medical therapy alone for symptomatic patients with intracranial arterial stenosis. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will identify RCTs comparing stenting vs medical therapy alone in patients with symptomatic ICAS stenosis (70%-99%) through a systematic search, mainly including PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov. Individual-level patient data for a prespecified list of variables will be sought from authors of all eligible studies. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days, or stroke in territory of qualifying artery beyond 30 days after randomisation. IPD meta-analysis will be conducted with a one-stage approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval and individual patient consent will not be required in most cases since this IPD meta-analysis will use pseudoanonymised data from RCTs. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and international conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022369922.
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.