ArticleEmergency radiology2025
Detectability of acute ischemic stroke with thin (3 mm) axial versus thin (3 mm) coronal diffusion-weighted imaging in patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dizziness.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Imaging suspected posterior circulation stroke in the emergency department: a practical modality-based review.Emergency radiology · 2026Review
- Cost-effectiveness of CT perfusion, low-field MRI, and delayed high-field MRI in emergency department patients with dizziness concerning for stroke.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Limitations and Blind Spots of Diffusion-Weighted Imaging in the Evaluation of Acute Brain Ischemia: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Capabilities of MRI and CT in Evaluating Dizziness: A Systematic Review of Acute Cases in the ED.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeIschemic strokes can cause vertigo, particularly when involving the posterior circulation of the brain. Prior research has suggested that thin-section (3 mm) axial or coronal DWI may improve the detection of ischemic stroke compared to thick (5 mm) DWI. However, relative sensitivity of differing thin DWI sequences is unknown. In this retrospective cohort study, we compare the sensitivity of thin coronal DWI and thin axial DWI in detection of brain ischemia. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective study at a single institution (2/18/2020-8/31/2023) of patients who presented to the emergency department with vertigo/dizziness and underwent an abbreviated MRI protocol (3 mm axial DWI, 3 mm coronal DWI, axial FLAIR, and axial SWI). For each case with an ischemic lesion, the visibility of infarct on thin axial and coronal DWIs was rated; location and size were also recorded. Visibility on either sequence was considered the reference standard. Sensitivity was compared with McNemar's test.
results615 abbreviated MRI examinations were performed; 24/615 (3.9%) had an ischemic lesion (15 cerebral, 7 brainstem, 13 cerebellar). 24 of these MRI examinations with ischemic lesions were performed using 3 mm axial MRI and on 3T MRI. All lesions (24/24) were visible on thin axial DWI (100% sensitivity, 95% CI: 0.95-1.00). Fewer lesions (20/24) were seen on thin coronal DWI (83% sensitivity, 95% CI: 0.72-0.91). The difference in sensitivity was statistically significant (p = 0.0374). Lesions not visible on coronal DWI were 2-8 mm in size, the largest in the middle cerebellar peduncle.
conclusionsThin coronal DWI may not improve additional diagnostic utility beyond thin axial DWI for the detection of ischemia in patients with dizziness. When designing protocols tailored for stroke detection (particularly in the posterior circulation), replacing conventional (5 mm) DWI with thin (3 mm) axial DWI may be preferable to adding a thin coronal sequence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40053160What 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.