Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30629664›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Validation of the extended thrombolysis in cerebral infarction score in a real world cohort.

Daniel Behme, Ioannis Tsogkas, Ruben Colla, Roland G Gera, Katharina Schregel, Amélie C Hesse, Ilko L Maier, Jan Liman, David S Liebeskind, Marios-Nikos Psychogios

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Is a picture-perfect thrombectomy necessary in acute ischemic stroke?Journal of neurointerventional surgery · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Daniel BehmeDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5353-9515
Ioannis TsogkasDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Ruben CollaDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Roland G GeraDepartment of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Katharina SchregelDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Amélie C HesseDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Ilko L MaierDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6988-8878
Jan LimanDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
David S LiebeskindNeurovascular Imaging Research Core and Stroke Center, Department of Neurology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, United States of America.
Marios-Nikos PsychogiosDepartment of Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) score of 2b is defined as a good recanalization result although the reperfusion may only cover 50% of the affected territory. An additional mTICI2c category was introduced to further differentiate between mTICI scores. Despite the new mTICI2c category, mTICI2b still covers a range of 50-90% reperfusion which might be too imprecise to predict neurological improvement after therapy.

aimTo compare the 7-point "expanded TICI" (eTICI) scale with the traditional mTICI in regard to predict functional independence at 90 days.

methodsRetrospective review of 225 patients with large artery occlusion. Angiograms were graded by 2 readers according the 7-point eTICI score (0% = eTICI0; reduced clot = eTICI1; 1-49% = eTICI2a, 50-66% = eTICI2b50; 67-89% = eTICI2b67, 90-99% = eTICI2c and complete reperfusion = eTICI3) and the conventional mTICI score. The ability of e- and mTICI to predict favorable outcome at 90days was compared.

resultsGiven the ROC analysis eTICI was the better predictor of favorable outcome (p-value 0.047). Additionally, eTICI scores 2b50, 2b67 and 2c (former mTICI2b) were significantly superior at predicting the probability of a favorable outcome at 90 days after endovascular therapy with a p-value of 0.033 (probabilities of 17% for mTICI2b50, 24% for mTICI2b67 and 54% for mTICI2c vs. 36% for mTICI2b).

conclusionsThe 7-point eTICI allows for a more accurate outcome prediction compared to the mTICI score because it refines the broad range of former mTICI2b results.

Indexed as

Mechanical ThrombolysisAgedAged, 80 and overCerebral InfarctionFemaleHumansMaleReperfusionRetrospective StudiesROC CurveTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID30629664
PMCPMC6328192

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.