Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31739771›Full record

ArticleStroke2019

Refined Sphenopalatine Ganglion Stimulator Placement and Intensity Setting to Augment Blood Flow and Neurologic Function.

Jeffrey L Saver, Nino Kharaishvili, Tamar Janelidze, Maia Beridze, Natia Zarqua, Yoram Solberg, Natan M Bornstein, IMPACT-24M Trial Investigators

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Stroke, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Sphenopalatine ganglion stimulation for the treatment of cerebrovascular ischemia.Clinical autonomic research : official journal of the Clinical Autonomic Research Society · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. 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

8 authors.

Jeffrey L SaverFrom the Department of Neurology and Comprehensive Stroke Center, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA (J.L.S.).
Nino KharaishviliDepartment of Neurology, Rustavi Central Hospital, Georgia (N.K.).
Tamar JanelidzeDepartment of Neurology, Kutaisi Referral Hospital, Georgia (T.J.).
Maia BeridzeDepartment of Neurology, First University Clinic, Tbilisi, Georgia (M.B.).
Natia ZarquaDepartment of Neurology, Zugdidi Referral Hospital, Georgia (N.Z.).
Yoram SolbergDepartment of Clinical Affairs, BrainsGate Ltd, Caesarea, Israel (Y.S.).
Natan M BornsteinBrain Division, Shaarei Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel (N.M.B.).
IMPACT-24M Trial Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Purpose- Two large, randomized trials indicated that sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) stimulation improves final disability outcome in acute anterior circulation patients with ischemic stroke with confirmed cortical involvement. This study evaluated 2 refinements in SPG stimulation treatment technique: (1) SPG electrode placement with real-time optical tracking guidance; and (2) stimulation intensity comfortable tolerance level selection using non-noxious facial physiological markers. Methods- This study was a single, active arm trial at 4 centers, enrolling patients with anterior circulation ischemic stroke, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale 1 to 6 including arm weakness subitem score ≥1, not receiving recanalization therapies, and within 24 hours of onset. Stimulation level was set based on ipsilateral facial tingling sensation or lacrimation. SPG stimulation effects were assessed by measuring volumetric blood flow in the ipsilateral common carotid artery by ultrasound and grasp and pinch strength in the affected hand before and during stimulation, and by change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale from day 1 to 7. Results- Among 50 enrolled patients, age was median 66 years (interquartile range, 60-74), 44% were female, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale median was 5 (interquartile range, 4-5), and median onset-to-screening time was 18 hours (interquartile range, 9-20). Median implantation skin-to-skin time was 4 minutes (interquartile range, 3-7), and all 50 implants were placed correctly. Comfortable tolerance level was found based on physiological biomarkers in 96% of patients, including 86% in the optimal, low-medium intensity range. SPG stimulation significantly increased common carotid artery peak systolic and end-diastolic blood flow (44%,

Indexed as

Cerebrovascular CirculationGanglia, ParasympatheticImplantable NeurostimulatorsPinch StrengthAgedAnterior Cerebral ArteryArmBrain InfarctionCarotid Artery, CommonElectric Stimulation TherapyFemaleHand StrengthHumansMaleMiddle AgedParesisbiomarkercollateral circulationelectrodegangliahand strengthnasolacrimal ductpinch strength

Identifiers

PMID31739771
PMCPMC7597988

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.