evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

9 questions · 15 findings · 1 reviews · Stroke

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 5 · 33.3%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 13.3%Low 7 · 46.7%Moderate 1 · 6.7%High 0 · 0%

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Functional outcomes · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)
3 findings from 1 review

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Neurological impairment · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Stroke‐related mortality · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)

General anaesthesia showed no clear difference in stroke‐related mortality compared with non‐general anaesthesia (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Intracranial haemorrhage · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Time to revascularisation · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

General anaesthesia vs non‐general anaesthesia

Target artery revascularisation (dichotomous; mTICI 2b–3) · acute ischaemic stroke endovascular treatment (long‐term)

General anaesthesia probably leads to higher target artery revascularisation (dichotomous; mTICI 2b–3) compared with non‐general anaesthesia (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review