Cochrane · systematic review · CD007574
Endovascular thrombectomy and intra‐arterial interventions for acute ischaemic stroke
Roaldsen, MB, Jusufovic, M, Berge, E, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021 · Cochrane Library
StrokeAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
5
current version
GRADE rated
5
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 2 · 40%High 3 · 60%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Endovascular thrombectomy interventions compared to standard therapy for acute ischaemic stroke
Population: acute ischaemic stroke
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Favourable functional outcome at the end of Endovascular thrombectomy interventions vs standard therapy | RR 1.5 [1.37, 1.63] | 18 studies · 3715 participants | High |
Death from all causes at the end of Endovascular thrombectomy interventions vs standard therapy | RR 0.85 [0.75, 0.97] | 19 studies · 3793 participants | High |
Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at the end of Endovascular thrombectomy interventions vs standard therapy | RR 1.05 [0.72, 1.52] | 10 studies · 1752 participants | High |
Neurological status at the end of Endovascular thrombectomy interventions vs standard therapy | RR 2.03 [1.21, 3.4] | 3 studies · 334 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Degree of recanalisation (TIMI grade) Endovascular thrombectomy interventions vs standard therapy | RR 8.25 [1.63, 41.9] | 2 studies · 198 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |