ArticlePloS one2025
Comparison of the ABC/2 formula with computer-assisted volumetry of ischemic cerebellar stroke.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Age-Related Volumetric Changes of the Posterior Cranial Fossa and its Structures in Stroke Patients.Cerebellum (London, England) · 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
- External Ventricular Drainage for Hydrocephalus Following Cerebellar Infarction: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCurrent guidelines suggest surgical decompression for ischemic cerebellar stroke in case of significant mass effect. Recent research has aimed to identify a possible threshold for mass effect. However, a computer-assisted volumetry in acute setting is time consuming and impracticable, wherefore the aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and clinical applicability of the ABC/2 method in case of ischemic cerebellar stroke. MATERIALS AND
methodsImaging data of 125 patients, including preoperative CT or MRI scans were used for volumetric analysis. The ABC/2 formula using scans in axial and coronal planes. BrainLab® Elements software was used for computer assisted volumetry by defining the region of interest allowing automated volumetric calculation. Measurements were conducted independently by blinded clinicians. Pearson correlation and Bland-Altmann test were used for statistical analysis.
resultsAmong the 125 cerebellar infarctions analyzed, there was no statistical difference of mean infarct volume measurement between the ABC/2 formula and computer-assisted volumetry (16.6mL vs. 15.91mL; range 0.8-67.7mL; p = 0.76). The Spearman correlation test indicated a strong correlation between the two methods (r = 0.985, 95% CI: 0.979-0.990, p < 0.0001). Discrepancies were most notable in smaller infarction volumes (<10 mL), prompting a subgroup analysis. For infarct volume less than 10mL, the ratio of volumetric differences ranged from 47% to 60%, with absolute volume differences from -3-3 mL whereas the ratio ranged from -20% to 29%, with absolute volume differences from -6-8 mL in cases with infarct volume greater equal 10mL.
conclusionABC/2 formula shows a good correlation with computer-assisted volumetry. Consequently, it could serve as a fast and practical tool for estimating cerebellar infarct volume and aiding decision-making in clinical practice. However, the limitations and variability of the ABC/2 method, particularly for smaller infarcts, must be considered.
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.