ArticleClinical neuroradiology2024
Thrombectomy Plus Intra-Arterial Thrombolysis Versus Thrombectomy for Acute Large Vessel Occlusions: a Matched-Control Study.
Article in Clinical neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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.
Funding
Abstract
aimWe conducted a matched-control analysis to compare the outcomes of large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients treated with mechanical thrombectomy (MT) plus Intra-arterial thrombolysis (IAT) versus those treated with MT alone.
methodsThe subjects of this study were chosen from ANGEL-ACT registry. All patients who received MT were identified and categorized into two groups: "MT + IAT" and "MT," based on whether or not they received additional intra-arterial medication IAT during the MT procedure. After being subjected to 1:1 propensity score matching, the outcome measures, including modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days, successful recanalization at the final angiogram, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) within 36 h, and death within 90 days, were compared.
resultsThe study encompassed a total of 1607 patients, with 641 individuals assigned to the MT + IAT group and 966 to the MT group. After applying propensity score matching, a total of 524 pairs were identified for comparison. The results indicated that there were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score (median: 3 vs. 3 points; P = 0.83), successful recanalization (89.9 vs. 88.9%; P = 0.62), sICH (8.3 vs. 8.7%; P = 0.79), and death (15.5 vs. 16.4%; P = 0.70).
conclusionsIAT during MT does not confer an elevated risk of sICH or mortality. Furthermore, the combination of MT and IAT may produce comparable functional outcomes in comparison to MT alone, when treating acute LVO patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38953962What 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.