ArticleStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2024
Rescue Stenting after Unsuccessful Recanalization of Endovascular Thrombectomy of the Posterior Circulation: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.
Article in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2024. 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.
- Blood pressure management in patients receiving rescue stenting after failed endovascular treatment in large vessel occlusion acute ischaemic stroke: a multicentre registry.European stroke journal · 2026Article
- Unmet Needs in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Overcoming Recalcitrant Clots.Cardiology in reviewReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The role of rescue stenting (RS) in acute ischemic strokes due to intracranial atherosclerotic disease-related large vessel occlusion is an area of active investigation. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of RS under these circumstances. Methods: A systematic literature review, conforming to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and OVID databases. Common and random effects analyses were conducted to compare outcomes including modified Rankin Scale score, 90-day mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage between patients receiving and those not receiving RS after failed endovascular thrombectomy within posterior circulation. Results: Ten studies comprising 1202 patients (730 RS, 472 control) were analyzed. RS was associated with a statistically significant improvement in functional outcomes, evidenced by a higher proportion of patients achieving modified Rankin Scale score ≤2 at 90 days (32.74% versus 21.19% in controls; Conclusion: RS for acute ischemic stroke in the context of intracranial atherosclerotic diseaserelated posterior circulation large vessel occlusion after failed endovascular thrombectomy is associated with improved functional outcomes, reduced mortality, and decreased symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage rates. These findings suggest RS as a beneficial intervention in this patient population. However, the retrospective nature of the included studies and their heterogeneity underline the need for further research, particularly through randomized controlled trials.
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.