↓ Skip to main content

Thrombectomy for ischemic stroke: meta-analyses of recurrent strokes, vasospasms, and subarachnoid hemorrhages

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
Title
Thrombectomy for ischemic stroke: meta-analyses of recurrent strokes, vasospasms, and subarachnoid hemorrhages
Published in
Journal of Neurology, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00415-016-8205-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert Emprechtinger, Brigitte Piso, Peter A. Ringleb

Abstract

Mechanical thrombectomy with stent retrievers is an effective treatment for patients with ischemic stroke. Results of recent meta-analyses report that the treatment is safe. However, the endpoints recurrent stroke, vasospasms, and subarachnoid hemorrhage have not been evaluated sufficiently. Hence, we extracted data on these outcomes from the five recent thrombectomy trials (MR CLEAN, ESCAPE, REVASCAT, SWIFT PRIME, and EXTEND IA published in 2015). Subsequently, we conducted meta-analyses for each outcome. We report the results of the fixed, as well as the random effects model. Three studies reported data on recurrent strokes. While the results did not reach statistical significance in the random effects model (despite a three times elevated risk), the fixed effects model revealed a significantly higher rate of recurrent strokes after thrombectomy. Four studies reported data on subarachnoid hemorrhage. The higher pooled rates in the intervention groups were statistically significant in both, the fixed and the random effects model. One study reported on vasospasms. We recorded 14 events in the intervention group and none in the control group. The efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy is not questioned, yet our results indicate an increased risk for recurrent strokes, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and vasospasms post-treatment. Therefore, we strongly recommend a thoroughly surveillance, concerning these adverse events in future clinical trials and routine registries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 10 18%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 44%
Neuroscience 7 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 22 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2023.
All research outputs
#5,001,725
of 24,525,534 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#1,292
of 4,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,787
of 360,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#28
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,525,534 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,820 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.