ArticleEuropean stroke journal2025
True versus pseudo-occlusion of the cervical internal carotid artery in acute stroke: A multicenter MR angiography study.
Article in European stroke journal, 2025. 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDifferentiating true from pseudo-occlusion of the cervical internal carotid artery (ICA) in acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing thrombectomy is crucial but challenging. We aimed to investigate the ability of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (CE-MRA) to differentiate true from pseudo-occlusion (defined as an isolated thrombus of the intracranial ICA suppressing ascending blood flow) of the cervical ICA in acute ischemic stroke patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsMulticenter, retrospective analysis of acute ischemic stroke patients with true or pseudo-occlusion of the cervical ICA and subsequent thrombectomy. Patients with preprocedural CE-MRA showing a lack of contrast filling in the cervical ICA on the symptomatic side were included. Six readers (three radiology fellows and three board-certified radiologists) independently evaluated the CE-MRA images for true or pseudo-occlusion of the cervical ICA using a rating scheme. Their assessments were compared with DSA results as the reference standard. Diagnostic accuracy measures, as well as inter- and intra-reader reliability for detecting pseudo-occlusion, were calculated and compared between subgroups.
resultsA total of 41 patients were included. The median age was 73 years, and 39% were female. According to the reference standard, 16 of 41 (39%) patients had a pseudo-occlusion of the cervical ICA, while the remainder had a true occlusion. The aggregated sensitivity and specificity from all readers were 72% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 62%-81%) and 86% (95% CI: 79%-91%), respectively. Board-certified radiologists performed better, with a sensitivity of 81% (95% CI: 67%-91%) and specificity of 92% (95% CI: 83%-97%). Overall, inter-reader agreement was moderate (κ = 0.48; 95% CI: 0.31-0.65) and reached substantial agreement within the board-certified radiologists subgroup (κ = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.45-0.85).
conclusionDifferentiating true occlusion from pseudo-occlusion of the cervical ICA using CE-MRA is feasible but requires training in specific imaging characteristics as well as experience in interpreting them, as evidenced by the higher diagnostic accuracy of board-certified radiologists. Correct distinction help in optimal material selection (e.g. size and type of guiding catheter) prior to endovascular treatment.
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.