ArticleCureus2025
Recurrent Idiopathic Cerebral Venous Thrombosis.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A 40-year-old female with a past medical history of beta thalassemia minor presented to the ED with an intractable headache, nausea, and vomiting. A CT head without IV contrast was performed that was negative for any signs of subarachnoid hemorrhage, or thrombotic etiology. The patient presented 48 hours later and was found to have cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). She was subsequently taken for mechanical thrombectomy. Despite mechanical thrombectomy, her intracranial pressure (ICP) continued to rise. The patient underwent neurosurgical intervention with placement of external ventricular drain (EVD). Despite EVD placement, pressure continued to rise intracranially. The patient then went for a repeat thrombectomy, which was unsuccessful as clots continued to reaccumulate. No existing tool or measurement can lead to better outcomes regarding CVT cases. It is possible that with improved imaging modalities, early diagnosis is possible with high clinical suspicion, but further data needs to be collected. Per our literature review, there is no existing data regarding reaccumulating of clot burden despite intervention. This case represents the need for a broader discussion about risk stratification to identify quantifiable measures for better patient outcomes.
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.