ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
The Clinical Significance of the Hyperintense Acute Reperfusion Marker Sign in Subacute Infarction Patients.
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hyperintense acute reperfusion marker and gadolinium leakage in ocular structures in stroke: a systematic review.Neuroradiology · 2025Pooled it
- Predictive Value of Hyperintense Acute Reperfusion Marker in Transient Ischemic Attacks: Stroke Recurrence and TOAST Classification.Brain sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe hyperintense acute reperfusion marker (HARM) is characterized by the delayed enhancement of the subarachnoid or subpial space observed on postcontrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) images, and is considered a cerebral reperfusion marker for various brain disorders, including infarction. In this study, we evaluated the cerebral distribution patterns of HARM for discriminating between an enhancing subacute infarction and an enhancing mass located in the cortex and subcortical white matter. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed consecutive patients who experienced a subacute ischemic stroke, were hospitalized, and underwent conventional brain magnetic resonance imaging including postcontrast FLAIR within 14 days from symptom onset, as well as those who had lesions corresponding to a clinical sign detected by diffusion-weighted imaging and postcontrast T1-weighted imaging between May 2019 and May 2021. A total of 199 patients were included in the study. Of them, 94 were finally included in the subacute infarction group. During the same period, 76 enhancing masses located in the cortex or subcortical white matter, which were subcategorized as metastasis, malignant glioma, and lymphoma, were analyzed. We analyzed the overall incidence of HARM in subacute ischemic stroke cases, and compared the enhancement patterns between cortical infarctions and cortical masses.
resultsAmong 94 patients with subacute stroke, 78 patients (83%) presented HARM, and among 76 patients with subcortical masses, 48 patients (63%) presented peripheral rim enhancement. Of 170 subcortical enhancing lesions, 88 (51.8%) showed HARM, and 78 (88.6%) were determined to be subacute infarction. Among 94 patients with subacute stroke, 48 patients (51%) had diffusion restrictions, and HARM was found in 39 patients (81.2%). Of the 46 patients (49%) without diffusion restriction, 39 patients (84.8%) showed HARM.
conclusionsThe presence of HARM was significantly associated with subacute infarctions. For the masses, a peripheral rim enhancement pattern was observed around the mass rather than the cerebral sulci on postcontrast FLAIR.
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.