ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2022
Perivascular spaces visible on magnetic resonance imaging predict subsequent delirium in older patients.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prediction of postoperative delirium in the elderly using imaging markers of cerebral small vessel disease.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Postoperative sepsis-associated neurocognitive disorder: mechanisms, predictive strategies, and treatment approaches.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Serum NFL and tau, but not serum UCHL-1 and GFAP or CSF SNAP-25, NPTX2, or sTREM2, correlate with delirium in a 3-year retrospective analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: It remains unknown whether perivascular spaces (PVS) are associated with delirium in older hospitalized patients. We aimed to determine the association between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-visible PVS and the risk of delirium in a cohort of older patients. Methods: We consecutively recruited older patients (≥70 years) admitted to the Geriatric Department of West China Hospital between March 2016 and July 2017, and their imaging data within one year before admission were reviewed retrospectively. PVS was rated on axial T2-weighted images in the basal ganglia (BG) and centrum semiovale (CS) using the validated semiquantitative 4-point ordinal scale. Delirium was screened within 24 h of admission and three times daily thereafter, using the confusion assessment method. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the associations between PVS and delirium. Results: Among 114 included patients (mean age 84.3 years, 72.8% male), delirium occurred in 20 (17.5%). In patients with MRI examined within 6 months before admission, CS-PVS was found to be associated with delirium (odds ratio [OR] 3.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-14.06, unadjusted; and OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.11-16.28, adjusted for age). The associations were enhanced and remained significant even after full adjustment of covariates (OR 7.16, 95% CI 1.16-44.32, adjusted for age, cognitive impairment, smoking, and Charlson Comorbidity Index). Similarly, the relationships between high CS-PVS and delirium were also strengthened after sequentially adjusting all variables of interest, with OR 4.17 (95% CI 1.04-16.73) in unadjusted model and OR 7.95 (95% CI 1.14-55.28) in fully-adjusted model. Adding CS-PVS to the established risk factors improved the risk reclassification for delirium (continuous net reclassification index 62.1%, Conclusions: CS-PVS on MRI acquired 6 months earlier predicts subsequent delirium in older patients and may have clinical utility in delirium risk stratification to enable proactive interventions.
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.