ArticleJournal of neurosciences in rural practice
Performance of serial CT ASPECTS for predicting stroke outcomes in patients with thrombolyzed acute ischemic stroke.
Article in Journal of neurosciences in rural practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of serial ASPECTS for predicting IHM and unfavorable outcome defined by a modified Rankin Scale score ≥3 at the time of discharge from the hospital in thrombolyzed AACIS patients. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study examined thrombolyzed AACIS patients admitted at Saraburi Hospital, a regional health-care facility in Thailand. The study was conducted between January 2015 and July 2022. The comparative predictive performance of the baseline ASPECTS, 24-h ASPECTS, and change in ASPECTS for IHM and unfavorable outcome was examined using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The optimal cutoff values were identified based on Youden's index and the nonparametric method to compare the area under the ROC curve (AuROC) among the three scales. The potential confounders adjusted by multivariable logistic regression were reported odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Three hundred and forty-five patients with thrombolyzed AACIS were analyzed; the median age was 61.8 ± 15.2 years. 53.0% were male, and the median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 11 points (interquartile range: 8-17). The AuROC for predicting IHM was 0.823 for the baseline ASPECTS, 0.955 for 24-h ASPECTS, and 0.920 for the change in ASPECTS. For predicting unfavorable outcome, the AuROC was 0.744 for the baseline ASPECTS, 0.853 for 24-h ASPECTS, and 0.800 for the change in ASPECTS. After adjusting for other factors, the OR for predicting IHM was 14.38 (95% CI: 1.69-122.57) for 24-h ASPECTS and 16.7 (95% CI: 4.36-64.01) for the change in ASPECTS. Regarding unfavorable outcome, the adjusted OR was 5.58 (95% CI: 1.83-17.01) for 24-h ASPECTS and 4.85 (95% CI: 2.45-9.60) for the change in ASPECTS. Conclusion: The 24-h ASPECTS and change in ASPECTS could be more precise predictors for predicting IHM and unfavorable outcome in patients with thrombolyzed AACIS.
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.