SynthesisNeurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology2025
Intensive versus less intensive blood pressure targets after mechanical thrombectomy in acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemodynamic management, specifically blood pressure, is essential to reduce mortality and preserve functional capacity. However, the literature is uncertain about the best blood pressure target to be adopted after performing mechanical thrombectomy in patients with acute ischemic stroke. Randomized clinical trials that compared blood pressure goals after mechanical thrombectomy were searched in the following databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Biomedcentral, and Cochrane Library. The last search was on September 19, 2023. The results obtained were used to construct network meta-analyses. A total of 1556 participants were enrolled from 4 randomized controlled trials (OPTIMAL-BP, ENCHANTED2/MT, BP-TARGET, BEST-II). The last article was not included in the network meta-analysis because it did not have common blood pressure targets. The outcomes compared were: mRS (modified Rankin scale), eTICI/mTICI scale scores, symptomatic and any intracerebral hemorrhage, post-intervention NIHSS, and post-intervention infarct volume. The outcomes using the mRS scale showed that better outcomes were reached with less intensive blood pressure targets when comparing < 120 mmHg vs. ≤ 180 mmHg, OR: 0.71 (95% CI 0.54 - 0.94), in the outcome of mRS 0-1. And for the mRS 0-2 outcome with comparisons < 120 mmHg vs. ≤ 180 mmHg, with OR: 0.59 (95% CI 0.44 - 0.77) and < 140 mmHg vs. ≤ 180 mmHg, with OR: 0.61 (95% CI 0.41 - 0.89). In patients with large vessel occlusion treated with mechanical thrombectomy and who achieved good reperfusion, intensive blood pressure lowering is not effective and might be harmful respect to non intensive blood pressure control in recanalized patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38880854What 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.