ArticleBrain sciences2025
Comparative Analysis of the ABC/2 Score and e-ASPECTS Software in the Determination of Acute Ischaemic Stroke Volume from Non-Contrast CT.
Article in Brain sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Atrial fibrillation detected after ischemic stroke (AFDAS) diagnosed by short-term monitoring: the importance of frontal hypoperfusion.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Article
- Development of the SIMPLE scoring system for predicting malignant brain edema in patients with large hemispheric infarction following acute ischemic stroke.Neurosurgical review · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeAccurate and reproducible methods for assessing infarct volume in acute ischaemic stroke have important therapeutic and prognostic implications for the choice and success of acute therapeutic interventions. However, there is no international consensus on the methodology employed in infarct volume assessment. We aimed to assess the reliability of the ABC/2 score and e-ASPECTS in the determination of infarct volume in acute ischaemic stroke.
methodsInfarct volume was measured from NCCT in stroke patients recruited ≤12 h of symptoms onset and at 24 h using the ABC/2 method. Automated ischaemic volume measurements were carried out using e-ASPECTS software. Measurements using ABC/2 were compared with e-ASPECTS to assess volume differences and reliability using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient.
resultsThirty-three patients with CT < 12 h from onset of symptoms and follow-up at 24 h were included in the analysis. Use of ABC/2 demonstrated low agreement between observers (0.490, CI 0.236-0.743,
conclusionsOur results suggest that e-ASPECTS is a reliable platform for ischaemic volume determination particularly in the hyperacute phase to inform management. However, the use of ABC/2 represents an alternative approach to e-ASPECTS in the rapid and reliable estimation of ischaemic infarct volume to inform prognosis and treatment decisions, particularly in cases of delayed presentation where infarction is established and arterial territory boundaries are easily identifiable.
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.