ArticleAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2015
Computer-assisted volumetric measurement of core infarct volume in pediatric patients: feasibility for clinical use and development of quantitative metrics for outcome prediction.
Article in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tissue Is the Issue: A Systematic Review of Methods for the Determination of Infarct Volume in Acute Ischaemic Stroke.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Nuclear Medicine Imaging Techniques in Glioblastomas.Neurochemical research · 2024Review
- Maternal Undernutrition Modulates Neonatal Rat Cerebrovascular Structure, Function, and Vulnerability to Mild Hypoxic-Ischemic Injury via Corticosteroid-Dependent and -Independent Mechanisms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Automated Estimation of Acute Infarct Volume from Noncontrast Head CT Using Image Intensity Inhomogeneity Correction.International journal of biomedical imaging · 2019Article
- Imaging of Pediatric Stroke.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2016Review
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
Abstract
background and purposeInfarct volume may predict clinical outcome in acute stroke, but manual segmentation techniques limit its routine use. We hypothesized that computer-assisted volumetric analysis to quantify acute infarct volume will show no difference compared with manual segmentation but will show increased speed of performance and will correlate with outcome. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients with acute stroke younger than 18 years were included. Infarct volume on diffusion-weighted imaging was quantified by using computer-assisted volumetric and manual techniques. The Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure scored clinical outcome. Computer-assisted volumetric and manual techniques were compared with correlation coefficients. Linear regression analysis compared Pediatric Stroke Outcome Measure with core infarct volume and percentage volume of brain infarction.
resultsTwenty-three patients were analyzed (mean age, 4.6 years). Mean infarct volume from computer-assisted volumetric and manual approaches was 65.6 and 63.7 mL, respectively (P = .56). Concordance correlation between methods was 0.980, and between users, 0.968. The mean times for segmentation between computer-assisted volumetric and manual techniques were <1 minute and 7.3 minutes (P < .001). The mean infarct volumes for good and poor outcome groups were 7.4 and 75.7 mL (P < .007). The mean percentages of infarcted brain parenchyma for good and poor outcome groups were 0.6% and 10.4% (P < .006). Volumes of 32 mL and 3% for infarcted brain were associated with poor outcome in all patients.
conclusionsComputer-assisted volumetric quantification of infarct volume is reproducible, is significantly faster than manual techniques, and may have important applications for future clinical workflow. Core infarct volumes and infarct percentage correlated with outcome severity.
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.