ArticleMedicine2019
Usefulness of hyperintense acute reperfusion marker sign in patients with transient neurologic symptom.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Hyperintense acute reperfusion marker and gadolinium leakage in ocular structures in stroke: a systematic review.Neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- Ipsilateral blooming of microbleeds after Hyperintense Acute Reperfusion Marker sign in an ischemic Stroke patient, a case report.BMC neurology · 2022Article
- The Clinical Significance of the Hyperintense Acute Reperfusion Marker Sign in Subacute Infarction Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It aimed to investigate the incidence and final diagnosis of hyperintense acute reperfusion marker (HARM) signs in patients initially suspected of having a transient ischemic attack (TIA).In retrospective manner, a series of consecutive series of patients who arrived at the emergency department and was initially assessed as TIA within 12 hours of symptom onset between July 2015 and December 2016 were enrolled. Conventional magnetic resonance imaging protocol including diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and pre- and post-contrast fluid attenuation inversion recovery imaging (FLAIR) was conducted to evaluate the ischemic lesion and prognosis. Through the review of medical records and imaging studies, their final diagnosis and its association with HARM signs on post-contrast FLAIR were investigated.A total of 174 subjects were enrolled (mean age, 64.0 ± 12.9 years old; male, 54.6%; DWI lesion, 17.8%). HARM signs were observed in 18 (10%) patients, and their final diagnoses were classified as true TIA (n = 11, 61%), seizure (2, 11%), posterior reversible encephalopathy (2, 11%), reversible cerebral vascular constriction (1, 6%) and unclassified encephalopathy (2, 11%). The co-occurrence of HARM and DWI lesions were observed in 7 subjects which were 6 subjects of true TIA (ischemic stroke) and 1 subject with RCVS related ischemic stroke.The observation of HARM sign would be helpful to confirm the ischemic insult and distinguish the other disease.
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.