Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36221941›Full record

ArticleJournal of stroke2022

CT- versus MRI-Based Imaging for Thrombolysis and Mechanical Thrombectomy in Ischemic Stroke: Analysis from the Austrian Stroke Registry.

Stefan Krebs, Alexandra Posekany, Alina Pilz, Julia Ferrari, Alexandra Bernegger, Christian Neumann, Siegfried Thurnher, Dominik Roth, Wilfried Lang, Marek Sykora and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of stroke, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Minimal Imaging Requirements.Journal of neuroendovascular therapy · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Stefan KrebsDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Alexandra PosekanyAustrian National Public Health Institute/BIQG, Vienna, Austria.
Alina PilzMedical Faculty, Sigmund Freud University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Julia FerrariDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Alexandra BerneggerDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Christian NeumannDepartment of Radiology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Siegfried ThurnherDepartment of Radiology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Dominik RothDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Wilfried LangDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Marek SykoraDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.
Austrian Stroke Unit Registry CollaboratorsDepartment of Neurology, St. John's Hospital, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background and purposeIt is unclear whether a particular stroke imaging modality offers an advantage for the acute stroke treatment. The aim of this study was to compare procedure times, efficacy and safety of thrombolysis and/or thrombectomy based on computed tomography (CT) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acute stroke imaging.

methodsData of stroke patients who received intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) and/or mechanical thrombectomy (MT) were extracted from a nationwide, prospective stroke unit registry and categorized according to initial imaging modality. Study endpoints included procedure times, symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH), early neurological improvement, 3-month functional outcome by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and mortality.

resultsStroke patients (n=16,799) treated with IVT and 2,248 treated with MT were included. MRI-guided patients (n=2,599) were younger, had less comorbidities and higher rates of strokes with unknown onset as compared to CT-guided patients. In patients treated with IVT, no differences were observed regarding the rates of functional outcome by mRS 0-1 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.05), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.08), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.22). Patients undergoing MT selected by MRI as compared to CT showed equal rates of functional outcome by mRS 0-2 (adjusted OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65 to 1.16), sICH (adjusted OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.69), and mortality (adjusted OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.09). MRI-guided patients showed a significant intrahospital delay of about 20 minutes in both the IVT and the MT group.

conclusionsThis large non-randomized comparison study indicates that CT- and MRI-guided patient selection for IVT/MT may perform equally well in terms of functional outcome and safety.

Indexed as

Computed tomographyMagnetic resonance imagingOutcomeThrombectomyThrombolysis

Identifiers

PMID36221941
PMCPMC9561210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.