ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Comparison of endovascular treatment outcomes in stroke patients with cardioembolic or intracranial atherosclerosis-predisposed large vessel occlusion.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The benefit of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion is now well established. EVT is highly effective for treating embolic occlusions; however, there remains ongoing debate regarding the optimal management of underlying intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). Current approaches often involve a combination of best medical therapy and mechanical rescue strategies, such as intracranial angioplasty or stenting. In this study, we aimed to compare EVT outcomes between patients with ICAD-related strokes and those with cardioembolic strokes. Materials and methods: The study was designed retrospectively. Data of patients admitted to the stroke center were analyzed. The results of the ICAD group were compared with the cardioembolic stroke group. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, medications, IV rtPA use before EVT, contraindications, radiologic imaging results, and mechanical thrombectomy results were evaluated. Modified Rankin Score (mRS) results at discharge and 3 months were analyzed. At the end of 3 months, those with mRS 0-2 were included in the good outcome group, and those with mRS 3-6 were included in the poor outcome group. In this study, propensity score matching (PSM) was implemented. The logistic regression model was used. Results: A total of 349 patients were included, with 12% classified in the ICAD group and 88% in the cardioembolic group. Through PSM, 40 matched patients were successfully identified in the cardioembolism group, corresponding to 42 patients in the ICAD group. During EVT, dissection (OR: 1.105, 95% CI: 1.002-1.219) and reocclusion after EVT ( Conclusion: In this comparative study of EVT outcomes in ICAD-related and cardioembolic strokes, no significant difference was seen in the rate of post-procedural hemorrhagic complications. It was observed that 3-month poor outcome rates were higher in acute stroke patients with ICAD compared to cardioembolic strokes. We revealed that patients with ICAD presenting with acute ischemic stroke demonstrated higher rates of complications (dissection) and lower recanalization rates following EVT. These results highlight the need for tailored therapeutic strategies and careful procedural planning in patients with ICAD to improve clinical outcomes.
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.