Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38284109›Full record

ReviewBrain circulation

No-reflow phenomenon following stroke recanalization therapy: Clinical assessment advances: A narrative review.

Yuan Kan, Sijie Li, Bowei Zhang, Yuchuan Ding, Wenbo Zhao, Xunming Ji

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain circulation. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

Yuan KanDepartment of Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Sijie LiDepartment of Emergency, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Bowei ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yuchuan DingDepartment of Neurosurgery, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Wenbo ZhaoDepartment of Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xunming JiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The no-reflow phenomenon (NRP) after successful vascular recanalization in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) has become a major cause of poor clinical prognosis and ineffective recanalization. However, there is currently no clear definition or unified clinical assessment method for the NRP. Therefore, it is urgent to clarify the clinical evaluation criteria for the NRP and develop new no-reflow evaluation techniques so that remedial treatment can be applied to AIS patients suffering from the NRP. In this brief review, a variety of NRP assessment methods and defining criteria for clinical practice are presented.

Indexed as

Angiographyarterial spin labellingno-reflow phenomenonperfusion imagingtranscranial Doppler

Identifiers

PMID38284109
PMCPMC10821681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.