ArticleBMC geriatrics2022
Clinical impact of microbleeds in patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging markers of cerebral small vessel disease are associated with Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Pooled it
- Monoclonal antibodies against beta-amyloid protein (lecanemab and donanemab) should not be used in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2025Article
- Erythrocyte-brain endothelial interactions induce microglial responses and cerebral microhemorrhages in vivo.Journal of neuroinflammation · 2023Article
- Risk Factor Analysis in Patients Exhibiting Cerebral Microbleeds and the Correlation with Cognitive Impairment.Gerontology & geriatric medicineArticle
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are more frequent in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) than in the general population. However, their clinical significance remains poorly understood. We carried out a multimodal approach to evaluate the impact of CMBs at a clinical, neuropsychological, and survival level, as well as on core AD biomarkers in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in AD patients.
methodsWe prospectively recruited 98 patients with mild-moderate AD. At baseline, they underwent brain MRI, and AD CSF biomarkers and APOE genotypes were analysed. An extensive neuropsychological battery was performed at baseline and after 1 year of follow-up. We analysed the stroke incidence and mortality with survival analyses.
resultsForty-eight (48.5%) patients had at least one CMBs. Eight (8.2%) patients had strictly nonlobar CMBs, 39 (40.2%) had any lobar CMB locations. The incidence of stroke was higher in AD patients with lobar CMBs than in those without CMBs (p < 0.05). Mortality did not differ among groups (p > 0.05). At the cognitive level, CMBs patients deteriorated more rapidly at 12 months according to MMSE scores, with no differences observed at 24 months. We did not observe differences in the other tests, except for an increase in caregiver burden in the CMBs group. The presence of cerebral amyloidosis and APOE ε4 were associated with a greater presence of CMBs.
conclusionCMBs are associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke in AD patients without differences in mortality. Patients with CMBs did not seem to have different consequences associated with cognitive decline except for an increase in caregiver overload.
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.