ArticleNeurocritical care2022
Blood Pressure Variability Indices for Outcome Prediction After Thrombectomy in Stroke by Using High-Resolution Data.
Article in Neurocritical care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of remimazolam and dexmedetomidine on perioperative hemodynamics, postoperative mood, cognition, and delirium in elderly stroke patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy: a single-center prospective cohort study.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- The evolution of personalized stroke thrombectomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBlood pressure variability (BPV) is associated with outcome after endovascular thrombectomy in acute large vessel occlusion stroke. We aimed to provide the optimal sampling frequency and BPV index for outcome prediction by using high-resolution blood pressure (BP) data.
methodsPatient characteristics, 3-month outcome, and BP values measured intraarterially at 1 Hz for up to 24 h were extracted from 34 patients treated at a tertiary care center neurocritical care unit. Outcome was dichotomized (modified Rankin Scale 0-2, favorable, and 3-6, unfavorable) and associated with systolic BPV (as calculated by using standard deviation, coefficient of variation, averaged real variability, successive variation, number of trend changes, and a spectral approach using the power of specific BP frequencies). BP values were downsampled by either averaging or omitting all BP values within each prespecified time bin to compare the different sampling rates.
resultsOut of 34 patients (age 72 ± 12.7 years, 67.6% men), 10 (29.4%) achieved a favorable functional outcome and 24 (70.6%) had an unfavorable functional outcome at 3 months. No group differences were found in mean absolute systolic BP (SBP) (130 ± 18 mm Hg, p = 0.82) and diastolic BP (DBP) (59 ± 10 mm Hg, p = 1.00) during the monitoring time. BPV only reached predictive significance when using successive variation extracted from downsampled (averaged over 5 min) SBP data (median 4.8 mm Hg [range 3.8-7.1]) in patients with favorable versus 7.1 mmHg [range 5.5-9.7] in those with unfavorable outcome, area under the curve = 0.74 [confidence interval (CI) 0.57-0.85; p = 0.031], or the power of midrange frequencies between 1/20 and 1/5 min [area under the curve = 0.75 (CI 0.59-0.86), p = 0.020].
conclusionsUsing high-resolution BP data of 1 Hz, downsampling by averaging all BP values within 5-min intervals is essential to find relevant differences in systolic BPV, as noise can be avoided (confirmed by the significance of the power of midrange frequencies). These results demonstrate how high-resolution BP data can be processed for effective outcome prediction.
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.