ReviewNeuroradiology2010
Imaging in childhood arterial ischaemic stroke.
Review in Neuroradiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Paediatric arterial ischemic stroke: acute management, recent advances and remaining issues.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2015Review
- Pediatric cerebral stroke: susceptibility-weighted imaging may predict post-ischemic malignant edema.The neuroradiology journal · 2013Article
- Diagnosis of moyamoya disease using 3-T MRI and MRA: value of cisternal moyamoya vessels.Neuroradiology · 2012Article
- Paediatric acute basilar thrombosis successfully treated with intravenous alteplase.BMJ case reports · 2012Article
- Ischemic stroke in infants and children: practical management in emergency.Stroke research and treatment · 2011Article
- Angiogenesis in steno-occlusive vasculopathies as a common pathway for intracranial haemorrhage. A report of six cases.Interventional neuroradiology : journal of peritherapeutic neuroradiology, surgical procedures and related neurosciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There remains a misconception that arterial ischaemic stroke (AIS) is a rare childhood disorder. Approximately 2-6/100,000 children are affected annually, and it is one of the top ten causes of childhood death. Following the ictus, up to 25% of children will have a recurrence, and two thirds of children will have a long-term disability with considerable socio-economic burden. The established vascular risk factors seen in adult stroke are rare in children. Instead, childhood AIS is associated with a variety of underlying aetiologies, including cerebral arteriopathies, sickle cell disease, cardio-embolic disease, infection, head and neck trauma, genetic/metabolic disease and prothrombotic abnormalities. Approximately 50% of children will have another recognised medical condition, and many children will have multiple risk factors. Given the complexity of the presentation and the potential ambiguity of the clinical findings, imaging is often the most revealing aspect of the diagnostic workup during both an acute and chronic presentation. This review considers the practical issues related to imaging children and looks at some of the controversies pertaining to aetiology and its implication for stroke management. It aims to give an overview of childhood arterial ischaemic stroke and to highlight the importance of both acute and delayed vascular imaging in the diagnosis, management and stratification of further stroke risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20445969What 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.