ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Drug-coated balloon angioplasty versus conventional angioplasty for symptomatic non-acute intracranial artery occlusion.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective: Non-acute intracranial artery occlusion (ICAO) is an important cause of recurrent ischemic stroke despite aggressive medical treatment. Conventional angioplasty has high incidences of perioperative complications and restenosis in treating these patients. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment has shown superiority in preventing restenosis. This study aimed to compare the DCB angioplasty with conventional angioplasty in symptomatic ICAO patients. Methods: From January 2016 to March 2024, consecutive patients with symptomatic non-acute ICAO treated with endovascular therapy were enrolled and dichotomized by whether DCB was used. Propensity score matching analysis was used to compare the perioperative complications, clinical and imaging follow-up results of the two groups. Results: 158 eligible patients were included in this study. There were 104 cases in the DCB group and 54 cases in the non-DCB group. A total of 92 matched patients were selected for propensity score matching analysis. At 6 months follow-up, the median stenosis degree (19.3% [0% ~ 34.3%] vs. 43.6% [22.8% ~ 80.2%], Conclusion: In patients with symptomatic non-acute ICAO, compared with conventional angioplasty, DCB angioplasty can effectively reduce the restenosis degree and restenosis risk.
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.