ArticleFrontiers in neurology2026
Direct balloon dilatation angioplasty for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis-related acute ischemic stroke: a single-arm retrospective study of technical feasibility and safety.
Article in Frontiers in 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Direct balloon dilatation angioplasty (DBDA) is an established treatment for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (IAS) without acute ischemia; however, its role in IAS-induced acute ischemic stroke (ICAS-LVO) remains poorly defined. This retrospective single-arm study aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and 90-day functional outcomes of DBDA in a selected cohort of patients with ICAS-LVO. Methods: Data from 28 consecutive patients with ICAS-LVO who underwent DBDA as the primary recanalization strategy at Huzhou Central Hospital (October 2018-December 2020) were retrospectively analyzed. Safety endpoints included intraprocedural dissection, plaque retraction, distal embolism, the need for remedial stenting, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and 90-day mortality. Technical success was defined as postprocedural modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (mTICI) grade 2b-3. Functional outcomes were assessed using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 90 days. Results: Among the 28 patients (mean admission NIHSS 16.5 ± 5.6), 23 (82.1%) received intravenous thrombolysis prior to intervention. Intraprocedural dissection occurred in one patient, and plaque retraction with flow failure occurred in another patient, with both patients requiring remedial stenting. sICH was observed in one patient (3.6%); no distal embolization or 90-day mortality was observed. Successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b-3) was achieved in 26 patients (92.9%; 95% CI 77.4-98.0%), with mTICI 2b achieved in 9 (32.1%; 95% CI 17.2-51.6%) and mTICI 3 in 17 (60.7%; 95% CI 42.2-76.8%) patients. The median puncture-to-revascularization time was 65 min (IQR 55-78). The median NIHSS at discharge was 4 (IQR 2-8). At 90 days, 18 patients (64.3%; 95% CI 45.8-79.8%) achieved functional independence (mRS 0-2). Conclusion: In this highly selected cohort of ICAS-LVO patients, DBDA was associated with a high rate of successful reperfusion and favorable 90-day functional outcomes. However, given the single-arm retrospective design, the absence of a control group, and the high rate of intravenous thrombolysis use, these findings are hypothesis-generating only. The observed outcomes cannot be attributed to DBDA alone and require validation in multicenter randomized 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.