ArticleStroke2014
Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging mismatch criteria to select patients for endovascular stroke therapy.
Article in Stroke, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The multiverse of mismatchness in neuroradiology for stroke assessment: a narrative review.European radiology · 2026Review
- Comparative validation of automated perfusion analysis software for ischemic penumbra estimation and EVT decision-making.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Effect of MR-guided perfusion imaging mismatch profiles within 6 h on endovascular thrombectomy outcomes.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation and subgroup analysis of the efficacy and safety of intensive rosuvastatin therapy combined with dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2023Article
- Effects of salvianolic acid on cerebral perfusion in patients after acute stroke: A single-center randomized controlled trial.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2018Article
- Better Diffusion Segmentation in Acute Ischemic Stroke Through Automatic Tree Learning Anomaly Segmentation.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2018Article
- Unknown onset ischemic strokes in patients last-seen-well >4.5 h: differences between wake-up and daytime-unwitnessed strokes.Acta neurologica Belgica · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeThe Diffusion and Perfusion Imaging Evaluation for Understanding Stroke Evolution 2 (DEFUSE 2) study has shown that clinical response to endovascular reperfusion differs between patients with and without perfusion-diffusion (perfusion-weighted imaging-diffusion-weighted imaging, PWI-DWI) mismatch: patients with mismatch have a favorable clinical response to reperfusion, whereas patients without mismatch do not. This study examined whether alternative mismatch criteria can also differentiate patients according to their response to reperfusion.
methodsPatients from the DEFUSE 2 study were categorized according to vessel occlusion on magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and DWI lesion volume criteria (MRA-DWI mismatch) and symptom severity and DWI criteria (clinical-DWI mismatch). Favorable clinical response was defined as an improvement of ≥8 points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) by day 30 or an NIHSS score of ≤1 at day 30. We assessed, for each set of criteria, whether the association between reperfusion and favorable clinical response differed according to mismatch status.
resultsA differential response to reperfusion was observed between patients with and without MRA-DWI mismatch defined as an internal carotid artery or M1 occlusion and a DWI lesion<50 mL. Reperfusion was associated with good functional outcome in patients who met these MRA-DWI mismatch criteria (odds ratio [OR], 8.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-31.3), whereas no association was observed in patients who did not meet these criteria (OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.08-3.1; P for difference between the odds, 0.01). No differential response to reperfusion was observed with other variations of the MRA-DWI or clinical-DWI mismatch criteria.
conclusionsThe MRA-DWI mismatch is a promising alternative to DEFUSE 2's PWI-DWI mismatch for patient selection in endovascular stroke trials.
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.