Evidence mapPaperPMID 40730628Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Propensity score matched analysis of nationwide outcomes for intracranial bypass and stenting for treatment of intracranial atherosclerotic disease.

Michael G Brandel, Spencer J Rosero, Karol P Budohoski, Craig J Kilburg, Ramesh Grandhi, Alexander A Khalessi, William T Couldwell, Robert C Rennert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Michael G BrandelDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
Spencer J RoseroDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Karol P BudohoskiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Craig J KilburgDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Ramesh GrandhiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Alexander A KhalessiDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA.
William T CouldwellDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Robert C RennertDepartment of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neurosciences Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. neuropub@hsc.utah.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Management options for refractory intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) involve intracranial stenting or bypass. By retrospectively analyzing National Inpatient Sample database data (2012-2019), we compared costs, complications, length of stay (LOS), and discharge disposition of patients who underwent elective intracranial stenting or bypass for ICAD. Analyses included propensity score matching (PSM; 1:1), multilevel mixed-effects generalized linear models, and logistic regression. Overall, 556 admissions were included (mean age 65.2 years). Patients undergoing bypass were more likely than stenting patients to be female (47.3% vs. 37.5%, p = 0.028) and to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 2 (77.2% vs. 61.5%, p < 0.001) but less likely to have a history of transient ischemic attack/stroke (52.2 vs. 62.0%, p = 0.027). PSM yielded a subset of 330 patients (165 stenting, 165 bypass). The unadjusted cost of bypass admissions exceeded that of stent admissions (mean $24,659 vs. $20,750, p = 0.056), driven by significantly longer LOS for bypass (B = 1.69, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the odds of complications or adverse discharge by treatment (p > 0.05). These data suggest that for patients with ICAD undergoing an elective intervention, bypass and stenting have largely comparable overall costs and short-term outcomes. Treatment for refractory ICAD should be individualized based on patient and clinical criteria.

Indexed as

Intracranial ArteriosclerosisStentsAgedFemaleHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBypassIntracranial atherosclerotic diseaseIntracranial stentingIschemic strokeOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID40730628
PMCPMC12307610

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.