SynthesisBrain and behavior2025
Meta-Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Intensive Blood Pressure Control After Thrombectomy.
Synthesis in Brain and behavior, 2025. 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.
- No-reflow phenomenon after vessel recanalization in acute ischemic stroke: mechanisms, diagnosis, and treatment directions.Journal of neurology · 2026Review
- Intensive versus standard blood pressure management after endovascular therapy in acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAfter successful endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke, there remains considerable controversy surrounding the efficacy of intensified blood pressure control therapy. Presently, numerous randomized controlled trials have yielded diverse findings. Thus, our objective is to consolidate all current randomized controlled trial data to evaluate whether intensified systolic blood pressure targets, in comparison to standard targets, offer superior safety and efficacy.
methodsBy searching the EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases, we identified randomized controlled trials comparing standard blood pressure control to intensified blood pressure control in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Efficacy outcomes included favorable clinical outcomes (defined as a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of 0-2 at 90 days), excellence clinical outcomes (defined as an mRS score of 0-1 at 90 days), and 90-day mortality. Safety outcomes included symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH). The relationship between standard and intensified blood pressure control post-EVT and the prognosis of patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing endovascular thrombectomy was expressed using risk ratios (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
resultsThe analysis encompassed four studies involving a total of 753 patients. After sensitivity analysis and exclusion of literature with significant heterogeneity, it was revealed that compared to intensified blood pressure control, standard blood pressure control was associated with excellent clinical outcomes RR of 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-0.90; p < 0.05; I
conclusionsAfter careful analysis, our conclusion is that intensified blood pressure control, compared to standard blood pressure control following endovascular treatment in acute stroke patients, does not yield better clinical outcomes and may even lead to inferior ones. Moreover, there is no significant disparity in terms of safety between the two approaches.
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.