SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2024
Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy computed tomography in the diagnosis of neurological complications after endovascular treatment of acute ischaemic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic accuracy of dual-energy CT in distinguishing intracerebral hemorrhage from contrast staining: a systematic review and meta-analysis with radiation dose assessment.La Radiologia medica · 2026Pooled it
- What you don't see matters: dual-energy CT in emergency radiology.Japanese journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Differentiating Hemorrhage and Contrast Extravasation After Mechanical Thrombectomy Using Virtual Non-Contrast Photon-Counting CT.Clinical neuroradiology · 2026Article
- A bicentric study on the application of dual energy CT for predicting hemorrhagic transformation post endovascular thrombectomy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate dual-energy computed tomography's (DECT) diagnostic performance in detecting neurological complications following endovascular therapy (EVT) of acute ischaemic stroke (AIS).
methodsWe performed the literature search using Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, EBSCO, and Science Direct databases for published related studies. The selected studies estimated the validity of DECT in the detection of neurological complications after EVT for AIS. Study quality assessment was performed utilizing the Quality of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 Tool. Our meta-analysis calculated the pooled sensitivity, negative likelihood ratio, specificity, and positive likelihood ratio for each detected complication. The summary receiver operating characteristics (sROC) curve was utilized to estimate the area under the curve (AUC).
resultsOf 22 studies, 21 were included in the quantitative synthesis. In the detection of intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH), DECT pooled overall sensitivity and specificity were 69.9% (95% CI, 44.5%-86.8%) and 100% (95% CI, 92.1%-100%); whereas, in the detection of ischaemia, they were 85.9% (95% CI, 80.4%-90%) and 90.7% (95% CI, 87%-93.5%), respectively. On the sROC curve, AUC values of 0.954 and 0.952 were recorded for the detection of ICH and ischaemia, respectively.
conclusionsDECT demonstrated high accuracy and specificity in the detection of neurological complications post-endovascular treatment of AIS. However, further prospective studies with a standardized reference test and a larger sample size are recommended to support these findings. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: DECT is a rapid and valid imaging tool for the prediction of ICH and cerebral ischaemia after the EVT of AIS.
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.