ArticleScientific reports2021
Predictors for affected stroke territory and outcome of acute stroke treatments are different for posterior versus anterior circulation stroke.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Predictors of Good Functional Outcomes in Posterior Circulation Stroke After Mechanical Thrombectomy With Stent Retrievers: An Individual Patient-Data Pooled Analysis From the TRACK and NASA Registries.Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Intravenous Thrombolysis in Posterior versus Anterior Circulation Stroke: Clinical Outcome Differs Only in Patients with Large Vessel Occlusion.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Predicting long-term outcomes for acute ischemic stroke using multi-model MRI radiomics and clinical variables.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- Outcome predictors in anterior and posterior ischemic strokes: a study based on the Iranian SITS registry.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Not so FAST: pre-hospital posterior circulation stroke.British paramedic journal · 2022Article
- Proportions, trends, and outcomes of posterior circulation ischemic stroke in the United States.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Distinct patient characteristics have been proposed for ischaemic stroke in the anterior versus posterior circulation. However, data on functional outcome according to stroke territory in patients with acute stroke treatment are conflicting and information on outcome predictors is scarce. In this retrospective study, we analysed functional outcome in 517 patients with stroke and thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy treated at the University Hospital Zurich. We compared clinical factors and performed multivariate logistic regression analyses investigating the effect of outcome predictors according to stroke territory. Of the 517 patients included, 80 (15.5%) suffered a posterior circulation stroke (PCS). PCS patients were less often female (32.5% vs. 45.5%, p = 0.031), received thrombectomy less often (28.7% vs. 48.3%, p = 0.001), and had lower median admission NIHSS scores (5 vs. 10, p < 0.001) as well as a better median three months functional outcome (mRS 1 vs. 2, p = 0.010). Predictors for functional outcome were admission NIHSS (OR 0.864, 95% CI 0.790-0.944, p = 0.001) in PCS and age (OR 0.952, 95% CI 0.935-0.970, p < 0.001), known symptom onset (OR 1.869, 95% CI 1.111-3.144, p = 0.018) and admission NIHSS (OR 0.840, 95% CI 0.806-0.876, p < 0.001) in ACS. Acutely treated PCS and ACS patients differed in their baseline and treatment characteristics. We identified specific functional outcome predictors of thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy success for each stroke territory.
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.