ArticleAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2024
Making Neuroendovascular Therapy for Cerebrovascular Disease Using Distal/Trans-radial Artery Access Safer.
Article in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuroendovascular therapy using distal/trans-radial artery access (d/TRA) has attracted attention as a less invasive procedure. We have selected dTRA or TRA in all cases of carotid artery stenting (CAS). In recent years, TRA has been actively selected for mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke (MT for AIS) and Onyx embolisation for arteriovenous malformations. We compared the patient background, surgical strategy, perioperative complications, and outcome in 41 patients who underwent CAS in the first period (Apr 2017-Feb 2019) and 12 patients in the second period (Apr 2020-Feb 2022) avoiding trans-femoral artery access (TFA) as possible. We compared the patient background, surgical strategy, perioperative complications, and outcome in 46 patients who underwent MT for AIS via TFA from Apr 2022 to Dec 2022 as the first period and five patients who underwent MT for AIS via TRA from Jan 2023 to Sep 2023 as the second period. Concerning CAS, the second period included significantly more symptomatic cases, with a higher rate of edaravone use to prevent hyperperfusion and a significantly smaller sheath diameter. In the second period, CAS was performed in severe conditions; nevertheless, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of either the ratio of cases detected by postoperative diffusion-weighted imaging positive or the ratio of cases with puncture site-related complications (PSCs). Concerning MT for AIS, there were no significant differences between the two groups with the patient backgrounds. The percentage of effective reperfusion, time from puncture to recanalisation, and outcome in the second period were all non-inferior to those in the first period when conventional MT for AIS was performed. Even though we introduced d/TRA in patients with cognitive decline and inability to remain at rest during the perioperative period, we completely avoided PSCs via d/TRA. In particular, cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome after CAS and ischaemia-reperfusion injury or re-occlusion after MT were rare but critical perioperative complications, and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) may be used to monitor these problems. We introduced intensive evaluation by NIRS if we had time to spare.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39400807What 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.