ReviewCurrent opinion in neurology2014
MRI-guided selection of patients for treatment of acute ischemic stroke.
Review in Current opinion in neurology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of magnetic resonance imaging- vs. computed tomography-guided reperfusion in acute ischemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Pooled it
- Quantitative susceptibility-weighted imaging may be an accurate method for determining stroke hypoperfusion and hypoxia of penumbra.European radiology · 2021Article
- Post-Stroke Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption and Poor Functional Outcome in Patients Receiving Thrombolytic Therapy.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Observational
- A comparison of two methods for MRI classification of at-risk tissue and core infarction.Frontiers in neurology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo summarize what is known about the use of MRI in acute stroke treatment (predominantly thrombolysis), to examine the assumptions and theories behind the interpretation of magnetic resonance images of acute ischemic stroke and how they are used to select patients for therapies, and to suggest directions for future research. RECENT
findingsRecent studies have been contradictory about the usefulness of MRI in selecting patients for treatment. New MRI models for selecting patients have emerged that focus not only on the ischemic penumbra but also on the infarct core. Fixed time-window selection parameters are being replaced by timing-based individualized MRI stroke features. New ways to interpret traditional MRI stroke sequences are emerging. SUMMARY: Although the efficacy of acute stroke treatment is time dependent, the use of fixed time windows cannot account for individual differences in infarct evolution, which could potentially be detected with MRI. Although MRI shows promise for identifying patients who should be treated, as well as excluding patients who should not be treated, definitive evidence is still lacking. Future research should focus on validating the use of MRI to select patients for intravenous therapies in extended time windows.
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.