SynthesisStroke and vascular neurology2025
Stenting for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis with different qualifying arteries: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis.
Synthesis in Stroke and vascular 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
20 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) relative to medical management in treating symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis (ICAS) varies based on the qualifying artery. This study aims to evaluate PTAS compared with medical therapy alone in cases of ICAS involving the internal carotid artery (ICA), middle cerebral artery (MCA), vertebral artery (VA) and basilar artery (BA).
methodsThis study involves a thorough pooled analysis of individual patient data from two randomised controlled trials, evaluating the efficacy of PTAS in comparison to medical management for symptomatic ICAS with different qualifying arteries. The primary outcome was stroke or death within 30 days postenrolment, or stroke in the region of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days through 1 year. A methodology based on intention-to-treat was employed, and HR accompanied by 95% CIs were used to convey risk estimates.
resultsThe data of 809 individuals were collected from Stenting vs Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis trial and China Angioplasty and Stenting for Symptomatic Intracranial Severe Stenosis trial. Four hundred were designated for PTAS, while 409 were assigned to medical therapy alone. For the primary outcome, patients with symptomatic BA stenosis had a significantly higher risk of receiving PTAS compared with medical therapy (17.17% vs 7.77%; 9.40; HR, 2.38 (1.03 to 5.52); p=0.04). However, PTAS had no significant difference in patients with symptomatic ICA (26.67% vs 16.67%; HR, 1.68 (0.78 to 3.62); p=0.19), MCA (8.28% vs 9.79%; HR, 0.85 (0.42 to 1.74); p=0.66) and VA stenosis (9.52% vs 10.71%; HR, 0.91 (0.32 to 2.62); p=0.86) compared with medical therapy.
conclusionsPTAS significantly increases the risk of both short-term and long-term stroke in patients with symptomatic BA stenosis. Without significant technological advancements to mitigate these risks, PTAS offers limited benefits. For symptomatic ICA, MCA and VA stenosis, PTAS provided no significant advantage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.