ArticleMedicine2017
Injury of the dentato-rubro-thalamic tract in patients with cerebellar infarct: Case report.
Article in Medicine, 2017. 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.
- Improvement of ataxia in a patient with cerebellar infarction by recovery of injured cortico-ponto-cerebellar tract and dentato-rubro-thalamic tract: a diffusion tensor tractography study.Neural regeneration research · 2019Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleSeveral studies using diffusion tensor tractography (DTT) have reported on injury in the dentato-rubro-thalamic tract (DRTT) in patients with brain injury. However, there is no study of injury in the DRTT following cerebellar infarct. We report on patients with injury in the DRTT following cerebellar infarct, demonstrated on DTT. PATIENT CONCERNS: Three patients with cerebellar infarct were enrolled in this study. Diffusion tensor imaging data were acquired at 3 weeks (patient 1) and 2 weeks (patients 2 and 3) after onset and the DRTT was reconstructed. The Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxiaand the Functional Ambulation Category were used for evaluation of ataxia and gait function. DIAGNOSES AND OUTCOMES: With clinical evaluation, patient 1 scored 18, patient 2 scored 22, and patient 3 scored 28 points on the Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia. On the Functional Ambulation Category patient 1 scored 2, patient 2 scored 2, and patient 3 scored 1 point. DRTT abnormalities were as follows: discontinuation (the upper portion of the left DRTT in the patient 1), narrowing (the lower portion of the left DRTT in patient 2, and the whole right DRTT in the patient 3), and nonreconstruction (the left DRTT in the patient 3). LESSONS: Using DTT, we demonstrated injury in the DRTT in 3 patients with severe ataxia following cerebellar infarct. We believe that evaluation of the DRTT would be helpful in patients who develop ataxia following cerebellar infarct.
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.