ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2022
Quantitative collateral score for the prediction of clinical outcomes in stroke patients: Better than visual grading.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Visual versus automated collateral scoring on CT angiography for predicting outcome after endovascular therapy for large-vessel occlusion stroke: a prospective multicentre study.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Automated Collateral Classification on CT Angiography in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Performance Trends Across Hyperparameter Combinations.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Elevated serum NLRP3 inflammasome level potentially predicts haemorrhagic transformation and unfavourable outcome in acute ischemic stroke patients.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Fractal-Based Quantitative Collateral Assessment for Thrombectomy Candidate Selection in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Preliminary Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Delayed neurological recovery in ischemic stroke patients undergoing endovascular treatment is associated with baseline hyperglycemia: a treatable cause of the stunned brain phenomenon?Journal of neurology · 2025Observational
- Automatic collateral quantification in acute ischemic stroke using UFrontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- The Pathophysiology of Collateral Circulation in Acute Ischemic Stroke.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To identify preoperative prognostic factors for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients receiving mechanical thrombectomy (MT) and compare the performance of quantitative collateral score (qCS) and visual collateral score (vCS) in outcome prediction. Methods: Fifty-five patients with AIS receiving MT were retrospectively enrolled. qCS was defined as the percentage of the volume of collaterals of both hemispheres. Based on the dichotomous outcome assessed using a 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS), we compared qCS, vCS, age, sex, National Institute of Health stroke scale score, etiological subtype, platelet count, international normalized ratio, glucose levels, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels between favorable and unfavorable outcome groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the effect on the clinical outcome. The discriminatory power of qCS, vCS, and their combination with cofounders for determining favorable outcomes was tested with the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: vCS, qCS, LDL-C, and age could all predict clinical outcomes. qCS is superior over vCS in predicting favorable outcomes with a relatively higher AUC value (qCS vs. vCS: 0.81 vs. 0.74) and a higher sensitivity rate (qCS vs. vCS: 72.7% vs. 40.9%). The prediction power of qCS + LDL-C + age was best with an AUC value of 0.91, but the accuracy was just increased slightly compared to that of qCS alone. Conclusion: Collateral scores, LDL-C and age were independent prognostic predictors for patients with AIS receiving MT; qCS was a better predictor than vCS. Furthermore, qCS + LDL-C + age offers a strong prognostic prediction power and qCS alone was another good choice for predicting clinical outcome.
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.