Intracranial stenting in atherosclerotic disease-recent results and challenges to face
Neuroradiology, ISSN: 0028-3940, Vol: 52, Issue: 7, Page: 633-644
2010
- 9Citations
- 17Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef7
- Captures17
- Readers17
- 17
Review Description
Intracranial stenting is increasingly used as an add-on to medical therapy despite the fact that the overall clinical benefit remains a matter of debate, since we lack results of randomized trials. Decision making on interventional treatment is made on the grounds of the anticipated risk of stroke with antiplatelet medication on one hand and on the experience with stent treatment based on data from case series and registries on the other hand. This review will summarize the current knowledge on both topics serving as the fundament of patient selection for intracranial stenting. A second objective is to highlight some specific problems that are encountered when treating patients interventionally. Procedure-related complication rates and rates of in stent stenoses are still too high to be confident that endovascular treatment is superior to medical therapy of symptomatic stenoses. Optimization of patient selection criteria, stent technology, and periprocedural management are necessary to become undoubtedly competitive with antiplatelet therapy. With the current stage of development, interventional treatment of intracranial stenoses should be confined to specialized centers with a high expertise in neurovascular procedures. © 2010 Springer-Verlag.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=77955570385&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20352418; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5; http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5; http://www.springerlink.com/index/pdf/10.1007/s00234-010-0678-5
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know