ArticleNeuroradiology2010
Accuracy of 3 T MR angioraphy in vertebral artery stenosis and coincidence with other cerebrovascular stenoses.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Increased risk for posterior circulation ischaemia in patients with vertebral artery hypoplasia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.European stroke journal · 2017Article
- Endovascular treatment of in-stent restenosis after vertebral artery ostial stenting: incidence, risks and outcomes.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOstium of vertebral artery (VA) is a common site of pseudostenosis on contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA). The purpose of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CE-MRA at 3 T in the evaluation of ostial stenosis of VA and to find associated coincidental stenoses using logistic regression analysis.
methodsOne hundred and thirty-five VA ostial regions from 72 patients who received CE-MRA of neck vessels, intracranial time of flight (TOF) MRA, and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were retrospectively reviewed. The sensitivity and specificity of the CE-MRA in detection of ostial stenosis were calculated with reference standard of DSA. Ostial stenosis on MRA was correlated with coincidental lesions in intracranial and cervical arteries by logistic regression analysis.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of the CE-MRA were 100% and 80.4% for detection of significant stenosis. In case of significant stenoses, CE-MRA showed a tendency of overestimation with a false-positive rate of 52.5%. Logistic regression analysis showed that the stenoses of middle cerebral artery (MCA) on TOF MRA was associated with significant stenoses of VA ostia (OR = 5.84, 95% confidence intervals 1.41-24.17).
conclusionCE-MRA is sensitive in detection of VA ostial stenosis although it has high false-positive rate. True positive ostial stenosis should be considered in cases of coincidental stenoses of MCA on TOF MRA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.