ArticleNeurologia medico-chirurgica2024
Differences between Acute Embolic and Atherosclerotic Middle Cerebral Artery Occlusion in Multiphase Arterial Spin-labeling Imaging.
Article in Neurologia medico-chirurgica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arterial spin-labeling magnetic resonance imaging (ASL-MRI) is widely used for evaluating collateral development in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS). This study aimed to characterize the findings of multiphase ASL-MRI between embolic and atherosclerotic large vessel occlusion (LVO) to aid in the differential diagnosis. Among 982 patients with AIS, 44 who were diagnosed with acute, symptomatic, and unilateral occlusion of the horizontal segment of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) were selected and categorized into embolic stroke (ES) and atherosclerosis (AT) groups. Using ASL-MRI (postlabeling delay [PLD] of 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 s) at admission, the ipsilateral to contralateral ratio (ICR) of the signal intensity and its time-course increasing rate (from PLD 1.5 to 2.0 and 2.5, ΔICR) were measured and compared between the two groups. The mean ICR was significantly higher in the AT group than in the ES group (AT vs. ES: 0.49 vs. 0.27 for ICR
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.