ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023
Quantitative assessment of collateral time on perfusion computed tomography in acute ischemic stroke patients.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Quantitative insights into stroke recovery utilizing delayed vessel ratio from color-coded multiphase computed tomography angiography.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Research Trends and Hotspots of Collateral Circulation in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Bibliometric Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim: Good collateral circulation is recognized to maintain perfusion and contribute to favorable clinical outcomes in acute ischemic stroke. This study aimed to derive and validate an optimal collateral time measurement on perfusion computed tomography imaging for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Methods: This study included 106 acute ischemic stroke patients with complete large vessel occlusions. In deriving cohort of 23 patients, the parasagittal region of the ischemic hemisphere was divided into six pial arterial zones according to pial branches of the middle cerebral artery. Within the 85 arterial zones with collateral vessels, the receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to derive the optimal collateral time threshold for fast collateral flow on perfusion computed tomography. The reference for fast collateral flow was the peak contrast delay on the collateral vessels within each ischemic arterial zone compared to its contralateral normal arterial zone on dynamic computed tomography angiography. The optimal perfusion collateral time threshold was then tested in predicting poor clinical outcomes (modified Rankin score of 5-6) and final infarct volume in the validation cohort of 83 patients. Results: For the derivation cohort of 85 arterial zones, the optimal collateral time threshold for fast collateral flow on perfusion computed tomography was a delay time of 4.04 s [area under the curve = 0.78 (0.67, 0.89), sensitivity = 73%, and specificity = 77%]. Therefore, the delay time of 4 s was used to define the perfusion collateral time. In the validation cohort, the perfusion collateral time showed a slightly higher predicting power than dynamic computed tomography angiography collateral time in poor clinical outcomes (area under the curve = 0.72 vs. 0.67; Conclusion: Our results indicate that perfusion computed tomography can accurately quantify the collateral time after acute ischemic stroke.
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.