ArticleStroke and vascular neurology2024
Association between stroke subtypes and outcomes of endovascular therapy: a post-hoc analysis of the ANGEL-ASPECT Trial.
Article in Stroke and vascular neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesOur study aims to examine the value of endovascular therapy (EVT) and its comparison to medical management (MM) in ischaemic stroke patients accompanied by large artery atherosclerosis (LAA) and non-LAA
methodsmodified Rankin scale score (mRS) was evaluated at 90 days post the stroke attack and was considered as the primary outcome. Other outcomes measured in this study included score changes of 0-2 and 0-3 on the mRS. The occurrence of symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at 24 hours after EVT was also measured as a safety endpoint. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the associations.
resultsIn the LAA group, no significant difference in mRS at 90-day (median IQR 3 (2-5) vs 4 (3-4), 95% CI 0.53 to 2.00, p=0.924), mRS 0-2 and mRS 0-3 was observed between EVT and MM groups. However, in the non-LAA group, patients who underwent EVT had lower 90-day mRS scores (4 (2-5) vs 4 (3-5), generalised OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.88, p<0.001). No interaction effect on the primary outcomes between treatment options and aetiology. More intracranial haemorrhage events within 48 hours were identified in the EVT group for both LAA and non-LAA cohorts (LAA: 40.98% vs 9.62%, relative risk (RR) 4.26, 95% CI 1.76 to 10.34, p<0.001; non-LAA, 52.07% vs 19.65%, RR 2.65, 95% CI 1.90 to 3.70, respectively).
conclusionsFor large infarcts, EVT may be more effective than MM for patients with non-LAA aetiology, but not for those with LAA stroke. As no interaction effect was found, the benefit of EVT compared with MM did not vary by stroke subtypes.
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.