SynthesisClinical neuroradiology2026
Mechanical Thrombectomy Versus Best Medical Treatment for Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke and Primary Distal Medium Vessel Occlusion: a Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinical neuroradiology, 2026. 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.
- CEREGLIDE 71 catheter for contact aspiration of secondary distal medium vessel occlusion: A case report.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- MiR-124 alleviates cerebral ischemia-reperfusion injury by targeting SLC1A5 to inhibit neuronal ferroptosis.Iranian journal of basic medical sciences · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDistal medium vessel occlusions (DMVO) in stroke patients represent a complex clinical challenge, primarily due to lack of conclusive evidence supporting the superiority of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) over best medical therapy (BMT). This meta-analysis aims to compare clinical outcomes between these two treatment strategies, focusing on functional outcomes assessed by means of modified Rankin Scale (mRS), overall mortality, early neurological improvement (ENI), and incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) or subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). MATERIAL AND
methodsThree investigators independently researched all main medical search engines (Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Library) to identify original papers comparing MT and BMT in patients with ischemic stroke due to primary DMVO. Primary endpoint was functional independence at 90 days (mRS 0-2), while secondary outcomes included excellent clinical outcome at 90 days (mRS 0-1), all-cause mortality, ENI, sICH and SAH.
resultsA total of 28 studies (3 randomized control trials and 25 retrospective observational studies) comparing MT to BMT, involving 7512 patients were included. Our findings indicate no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes, both for functional independence (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.91-1.21) and excellent outcome (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.92-1.24). No statistically significant differences were observed for overall mortality (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.80-1.27), ENI (OR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.67-2.51) and rate of sICH (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.55-1.58). Statistically significant results were seen on SAH rate which was higher in the MT group (OR: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00-0.11).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis did not support the routine use of MT in the treatment of DMVO. Rather, it indicates that MT + BMT does not lead to an increased proportion of patients achieving functional independence or excellent outcome at 3 months, nor does it reduce mortality rates compared to BMT alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41369739What 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.