ArticleArquivos de neuro-psiquiatria2024
Evaluation of the relationship between computed tomography angiography collateral scores and clinical outcome.
Article in Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe relationship between collateral circulation and prognosis after endovascular treatment in anterior circulation strokes has been reported in many studies.
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to compare the predictive power of clinical outcome by comparing five different collateral scores that are frequently used.
methodsAmong the patients who underwent endovascular treatment in our clinic between November 2019 and December 2021, patients with premorbid mRS < 3, intracranial ICA and/or MCA M1 occlusion, and a pre-procedural multiphase CTA examination were included in the study. Demographic, technical, and duration information about the procedure, major events after the procedure, and clinical outcomes at 3 months were recorded. The mCTA, Tan, Maas, Miteff, and rLMC collateral scores of the patients were evaluated.
resultsClinical outcome at 3 months were good in 37 of the 68 patients included in the study (mRS ≤ 2). Only the mCTA and rLMC collateral scores were statistically significantly higher in those with a good clinical outcome. Significant correlation with 3-month mRS was detected only in mCTA and rLMC scores. Although rLMC and mCTA collateral scores showed a statistically significant association with prognosis, they were not sufficient to be an independent predictor of prognosis.
conclusionmCTA and rLMC were found to have the highest predictive power of clinical outcome and the highest correlation with the 3-month clinical outcome. Our study suggests that it would be beneficial to develop a new scoring system over multiphase CTA, which combines regional and temporal evaluation, which are the strengths of both collateral scoring.
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.