ReviewCureus2024
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Thrombectomy Versus Thrombolysis for Large Vessel Occlusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systemic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Baseline ASPECTS, Fibrinogen Level, and Platelet Count for Predicting Hemorrhagic Transformation After Mechanical Thrombectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Algorithms' Diagnostic Efficacy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet Models.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is a common cause behind a significant number of people who develop disabilities or die worldwide. Most of the strokes that occur globally are attributed to AIS as a result of large vessel occlusions that typically occur in arteries like the internal carotid and middle cerebral arteries. Primary treatments for AIS are mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and intravenous thrombolysis (IVT), and the clinical scenario can dictate what method would provide the most optimal outcome for the patient. MT has a more favorable efficacy and safety profile but can be more technically challenging and time-consuming. This article conducts a comparison with regard to safety and efficacy between MT and IVT, which are the primary treatment methods for AIS. The PubMed, Cochrane Library, Europe PubMed Central, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases were used to search for relevant articles. This search was conducted from June 2024 to July 2024. The process involved examining the titles and abstracts of all relevant publications after which, the selected articles were read entirely to confirm eligibility. The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions I tool was used to assess for bias in the articles selected. The management of AIS involving IVT with or without MT is highly dependent on the clinical scenario. Nevertheless, MT alone has demonstrated better or comparable functional outcomes in patients compared to both bridging therapy (BT) and IVT alone. However, it is important to note that in select patient groups, such as those with large artery atherosclerosis, BT has been able to show better efficacy than MT alone. Given the significant burden of AIS on patient quality of life and healthcare spending, it is prudent to continue to explore newer thrombolytics and thrombectomy techniques.
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.