SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Efficacy of double anastomosis STA-MCA bypass in adult Moyamoya disease and cerebral atherosclerosis disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 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.
- Semi-Quantitative Assessment of Regional Cerebral Blood Flow Changes Following Extracranial-Intracranial Bypass Using SPECT: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Early postoperative seizure after extracranial-intracranial revascularization for moyamoya disease and moyamoya syndrome: single centre post-revascularization moyamoya cohort study in Indonesia.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Double anastomosis Superficial Temporal Artery-Middle Cerebral Artery (STA-MCA) bypass in Moyamoya disease (MMD) and cerebral atherosclerosis disease (CAD) remains underexplored. We aim to evaluate the clinical efficacy and vascular dynamics of double anastomosis STA-MCA bypass in each group, MMD and CAD. A systematic search was conducted in ScienceDirect, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases until September 2024. Efficacy outcomes included stroke occurrences, patency, modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and complications. Vascular parameters included cerebral blood flow (CBF), cut flow index (CFI), MCA perfusion, and mean transit time (MTT). The meta-analysis included 15 studies with 417 patients (46.18 ± 4.69 years). At final follow-up, the MMD group showed lower total stroke (12 ± 7% vs. 20 ± 9%; p = 0.63), ischemic stroke (8 ± 5% vs. 18 ± 8%; p = 0.26), hemorrhagic stroke (4 ± 3% vs. 10 ± 7%; p = 0.49), and patency (85 ± 11% vs. 98 ± 8%; p = 0.10) compared to CAD group, without statistical difference. The MMD group exhibited reduced mRS (MD: -0.57; 95%CI: -0.95 to -0.19; p = 0.003), increased CBF (MD: 14.75; 95%CI: 2.32 to 27.19; p = 0.020), and increased MCA perfusion (MD: 9.28; 95%CI: 1.19 to 17.37; p = 0.025). CFI (1.30 ± 0.11 vs. 1.08 ± 0.13; p = 0.02) and MTT (4.49 ± 0.5 vs. 1.27 ± 0.27; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the CAD group. Both 1D2R (MD: 27.59; 95%CI: 4.88 to 50.30; p = 0.017) and 2D2R (MD: 14.75; 95%CI: 2.32 to 27.19; p = 0.020) techniques exhibited increase in CBF. Additionally, double anastomosis showed a higher CFI compared to single anastomosis (MD: 0.25; 95%CI: 0.12-0.38; p < 0.001). Double anastomosis STA-MCA bypass demonstrated comparable stroke and patency rates between groups. MMD patients had significantly higher CFI and MTT values, with double anastomosis yielding superior CFI compared to single anastomosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40817938What 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.