ReviewSurgical neurology international2025
Elucidating the benefit of drug-eluting stent for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Review in Surgical neurology international, 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.
- A narrative review of the role of renal artery intervention in renovascular hypertension.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) is a major global cause of stroke. Patient with high risk of recurring strokes despite standard medication therapy usually needs aggressive medical treatment such as self-expanding and balloon-expandable stents. Drug-eluting stents (DESs), with anti-vascular endothelial cell proliferation drugs, aim to inhibit smooth muscle cells proliferation and migration, providing a promising alternative to standard bare metal stents (BMS). This study compared the advantages and safety of DES to BMS in symptomatic ICAS patients. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted through PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Science Direct in May 2024, adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Randomized trials comparing DES and BMS for symptomatic intracranial and vertebral artery stenosis were included in the study. Meta-analysis was carried out by RevMan software to analyze and odds ratio (OR) for primary and secondary outcomes. Results: Three randomized controlled trials ( Conclusion: Intravascular DES is more effective than BMS in lowering risk of ISR and incidence of ischemic stroke in symptomatic ICAS.
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.