ArticleBMC neurology2026
Symptomatic right vertebral artery web treated with stent implantation and 6-month angiographic follow-up.
Article in BMC neurology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVertebral artery (VA) webs are rare intraluminal shelf-like protrusion considered a potential cause of posterior circulation ischemia. Because of its atypical imaging features, it is often misdiagnosed as arterial dissection or atherosclerotic stenosis. Evidence regarding optimal management remains limited; current treatment options include antithrombotic therapy, angioplasty, and stent implantation, yet no clinical studies have established the best treatment strategy. CASE PRESENTATION: We report the case of a 68-year-old man with a 3-month history of recurrent dizziness. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) revealed a web in the right V1 segment with severe stenosis. After exclusion of alternative etiologies, the dizziness was considered to be related to posterior circulation ischemia attributable to the VA lesion. Despite treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, and atorvastatin, the patient continued to experience recurrent symptoms. He subsequently underwent successful stent implantation, with complete resolution of symptoms. Follow-up angiography at 6 months demonstrated mild in-stent restenosis (ISR) accompanied by stent fracture.
conclusionsThis case highlights that VA web should be considered in patients with unexplained posterior circulation ischemia. Stent implantation may represent an effective treatment option for symptomatic patients refractory to medical therapy; however, the risk of post-procedural restenosis should be recognized. Long-term follow-up and further studies are required to determine optimal management strategies.
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.