ArticlePloS one2021
Associations between cerebral magnetic resonance imaging infarct volume and acute ischemic stroke etiology.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Association Between Stress Hyperglycemia Ratio and Short-Term Outcomes After Successful Recanalization by Mechanical Thrombectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Distinct spatiotemporal patterns of white matter hyperintensity progression.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging Infarct Volume Correlates with Carotid Intima-Media Thickness and Plaque Echotexture in Ischemic Stroke.Journal of the West African College of SurgeonsArticle
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIdentifying ischemic stroke etiology is necessary for proper treatment and secondary prevention. We sought to define associations between infarct volume and stroke subtypes. MATERIALS AND
methodsInclusion criteria necessitated a Johns Hopkins Hospital inpatient admission (2017-2019) for ischemic stroke with confirmatory brain magnetic resonance imaging. Infarct volume was calculated using MRIcron© by a masked reviewer. Ischemic strokes were adjudicated using TOAST classification. Multivariable/multinomial logistic regression determined associations between infarct volume and stroke subtypes with interaction terms for infarct number and location. Stepwise adjustment accounted for potential confounders.
resultsPatients (N = 150) were on average 61 years old, male (58%), and black (57%). Each 5mL increase in infarct volume was associated with cardioembolic (OR 1.07, 95%CI 1.01-1.14) and large-artery occlusions (OR 1.10, 95%CI 1.02-1.18), but lower odds of lacunar stroke (OR 0.18, 95%CI 0.06-0.55). There was no difference in risk of cardioembolic (base) and large-artery atherosclerotic strokes with increasing infarct volume (RRR 1.01, 95%CI 0.94-1.09), but risk of lacunar stroke was decreased (RRR 0.17, 95%CI 0.06-0.53). Infarct number (single vs multiple) modified the association between volume and subtype for large-artery occlusions (p-interaction 0.09).
conclusionsIn this study, larger volume infarcts were significantly associated with both cardioembolic and large-artery atherosclerotic strokes (no difference in the degree of association) and decreased odds of lacunar stroke. A single, large-volume stroke was associated with large-artery atherosclerosis, while multiple infarcts were associated with cardioembolism. Given the differential associations between volume, number of lesions, and stroke etiology, defining stroke subtypes in light of infarct volume might aid in clinical practice.
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.