SynthesisFrontiers in neurology2026
Comparison of angioplasty, stents and conventional medical therapy for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Medical treatment and endovascular therapy are widely employed in the management of symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis, however, the comparative effectiveness of these treatment modalities remains uncertain. Methods: We searched major Chinese and English databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing four different endovascular modalities against other comparable non-endovascular therapies for patients with symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (sICAS). Eligible participants were individuals who had experienced a transient ischemic attack (TIA) or non-disabling stroke within the preceding 12 months. The literature search cutoff date was 11 January 2026. Results: For safety outcomes, the SUCRA ranking was as follows: medical treatment (MT) (SUCRA 90.1%) > drug-coated balloons (DCB) (SUCRA 52.8%) > balloon dilatation angioplasty (BDA) (SUCRA 40.7%) > bare metal stents (BMS) (SUCRA 35.4%) > drug-eluting stents (DES) (SUCRA 31.0%). MT exhibited a superior safety profile compared with BMS, with a statistically significant difference (RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.72). For long-term outcomes, exploratory SUCRA probability rankings were as follows: BDA (SUCRA 86.7%) > DES (SUCRA 77.4%) > MT (SUCRA 23.8%) > BMS (SUCRA 12.1%), and between-treatment differences were not statistically significant across all interventions. Conclusion: In terms of short-term safety, BMS treatment strategies were significantly inferior to medical treatment (MT), while no statistically significant differences in safety were observed among the various endovascular treatment modalities. In terms of adverse events during long-term follow-up, between-treatment differences were not statistically significant. Despite relatively high SUCRA values for BDA and DES for long-term outcomes, these rankings should be interpreted cautiously given the lack of statistically significant inter-group differences. Further research is required to verify the performance of each endovascular treatment strategy about restenosis. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, CRD420251146704.
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.