ArticleNeuroradiology2024
Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging of intracranial and extracranial blood flow in carotid near-occlusion.
Article in Neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational Modeling of Collateral Circulation and Arteriolar Vasodilation in Ischemic Tissue Perfusion.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Duplex ultrasound in severe carotid stenosis: diagnostic performance for differentiating near-occlusion subtypes from conventional high-grade stenosis.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Correlation between P2-PCA Volume Flow Rate and BOLD Cerebrovascular Reactivity in Patients with Symptomatic Carotid Artery Occlusion.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2025Article
- The pitfalls and challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with carotid near-occlusion: a narrative review.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCompare extracranial internal carotid artery flow rates and intracranial collateral use between conventional ≥ 50% carotid stenosis and carotid near-occlusion, and between symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid near-occlusion.
methodsWe included patients with ≥ 50% carotid stenosis. Degree of stenosis was diagnosed on CTA. Mean blood flow rates were assessed with four-dimensional phase-contrast MRI.
resultsWe included 110 patients of which 83% were symptomatic, and 38% had near-occlusion. Near-occlusions had lower mean internal carotid artery flow (70 ml/min) than conventional ≥ 50% stenoses (203 ml/min, P < .001). Definite use of ≥ 1 collateral was found in 83% (35/42) of near-occlusions and 10% (7/68) of conventional stenoses (P < .001). However, there were no differences in total cerebral blood flow (514 ml/min vs. 519 ml/min, P = .78) or ipsilateral hemispheric blood flow (234 vs. 227 ml/min, P = .52), between near-occlusions and conventional ≥ 50% stenoses, based on phase-contrast MRI flow rates. There were no differences in total cerebral or hemispheric blood flow, or collateral use, between symptomatic and asymptomatic near-occlusions.
conclusionNear-occlusions have lower internal carotid artery flow rates and more collateral use, but similar total cerebral blood flow and hemispheric blood flow, compared to conventional ≥ 50% carotid stenosis.
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.