ArticleCureus2025
Efficacy of Intravenous Thrombolysis for the Prognosis of Branch Atheromatous Disease.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Thrombolysis with Tenecteplase in Patients with Wake-Up Branch Atheromatous Disease.Translational stroke research · 2026Article
- Blood Pressure Variability and 90-Day Functional Outcome in Branch Atheromatous Disease-Related Stroke: A Multicenter Prospective Study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Branch atheromatous disease (BAD) is often resistant to treatment, and the efficacy of intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) using recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator remains uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of IVT on the prognosis of patients with BAD. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of BAD patients who arrived at our hospital within 4.5 hours of symptom onset. Patients were divided into two groups based on treatment: the IVT group (n = 11) and the non-IVT group (n = 87). In the IVT group, alteplase (0.6 mg/kg) was administered intravenously. Clinical outcomes were compared between these groups. Additionally, within the IVT group, we performed a subgroup analysis, defining patients with a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of ≤2 at discharge as having a favorable outcome and those with an mRS score of ≥3 as having an unfavorable outcome. Patients in the IVT group were significantly younger than those in the non-IVT group (62.4 years vs. 75.4 years; p = 0.0003). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores at admission and discharge or in mRS scores at discharge. In the IVT group, patients with a favorable prognosis (n = 5) were significantly younger than those with a poor prognosis (n = 6) (53.4 years vs. 69.8 years; p = 0.0088). However, NIHSS scores at admission did not significantly differ between the favorable and poor prognosis groups. No intracranial hemorrhagic complications were observed in the IVT group. This study found no clear benefit of IVT on the prognosis of BAD patients, underscoring the need for novel treatment strategies. Age appears to influence the prognosis of BAD patients treated with IVT, consistent with findings in ischemic stroke in general. This study had a small sample size for the IVT group and was a retrospective, single-center observational study. Therefore, a large-scale prospective randomized controlled trial is needed to evaluate the efficacy of IVT for BAD in the future.
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.