Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38654740›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2024

The dilemma of neuroprotection trials in times of successful endovascular recanalization.

Antje Schmidt-Pogoda, Johannes Kaesmacher, Nadine Bonberg, Nils Werring, Jan-Kolja Strecker, Mailin Hannah Marie Koecke, Carolin Beuker, Jan Gralla, Raphael Meier, Heinz Wiendl and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 91% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Antje Schmidt-Pogoda *Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Johannes Kaesmacher *University Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Bern, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Nadine Bonberg *Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Nils WerringDepartment of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jan-Kolja StreckerDepartment of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Mailin Hannah Marie KoeckeDepartment of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Carolin BeukerDepartment of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jan GrallaUniversity Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Bern, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Raphael MeierUniversity Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Bern, Inselspital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Heinz WiendlDepartment of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Heike Minnerup *Institute of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Urs Fischer *Department of Neurology, University Hospital Basel, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Jens Minnerup *Department of Neurology with Institute of Translational Neurology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
University of Münster · DEUniversity of Bern · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The "translational roadblock" between successful animal stroke studies and neutral clinical trials is usually attributed to conceptual weaknesses. However, we hypothesized that rodent studies cannot inform the human disease due to intrinsic pathophysiological differences between rodents and humans., i.e., differences in infarct evolution. Methods: To verify our hypothesis, we employed a mixed study design and compared findings from meta-analyses of animal studies and a retrospective clinical cohort study. For animal data, we systematically searched pubmed to identify all rodent studies, in which stroke was induced by MCAO and at least two sequential MRI scans were performed for infarct volume assessment within the first two days. For clinical data, we included 107 consecutive stroke patients with large artery occlusion, who received MRI scans upon admission and one or two days later. Results: Our preclinical meta-analyses included 50 studies with 676 animals. Untreated animals had a median post-reperfusion infarct volume growth of 74%. Neuroprotective treatments reduced this infarct volume growth to 23%. A retrospective clinical cohort study showed that stroke patients had a median infarct volume growth of only 2% after successful recanalization. Stroke patients with unsuccessful recanalization, by contrast, experienced a meaningful median infarct growth of 148%. Conclusion: Our study shows that rodents have a significant post-reperfusion infarct growth, and that this post-reperfusion infarct growth is the target of neuroprotective treatments. Stroke patients with successful recanalization do not have such infarct growth and thus have no target for neuroprotection.

Indexed as

acute strokeinfarct growthmechanical thrombectomyneuroprotectiontranslational failures

Identifiers

PMID38654740
PMCPMC11035835
OpenAlexW4394618743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.