Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38880854›Full record

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.

Bruno Felipe Santos de Oliveira, Rafaela Góes Bispo, Bruna Helena Ribeiro Araújo Dos Santos, Luiz Filippe Vago Pereira, Gabriele Eliza Assis, Pedro Fernandes Abbade, Ana Beatriz Cazé, Beatriz Malaquias Neves, Jamary Oliveira-Filho

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

9 authors.

Bruno Felipe Santos de OliveiraFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil. bruno.oliveiraphysci@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5379-9843
Rafaela Góes BispoFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Bruna Helena Ribeiro Araújo Dos SantosFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Luiz Filippe Vago PereiraFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Gabriele Eliza AssisFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Pedro Fernandes AbbadeFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Ana Beatriz CazéFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Beatriz Malaquias NevesFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.
Jamary Oliveira-FilhoFaculty of Medicine of Bahia, Federal University of Bahia, Bahia, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Blood PressureIschemic StrokeThrombectomyHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAcute ischemic strokeIschemiaNeurologyThrombectomyThrombolysis

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.