ArticleAnnals of neurology2026
Timing of Peri-Ictal MRI Abnormalities in Status Epilepticus - One Size Does Not Fit All.
Article in Annals of neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuroimaging of the ictal-interictal continuum: Where do we stand? A systematic review and meta-analysis of current evidence.Epilepsia open · 2026Review
- Review
- Ictal-interictal continuum and status epilepticus: Two sides of the same coin? A prospective magnetic resonance imaging study.Epilepsia · 2026Article
- Refractory Status Epilepticus Following Erroneous Intrathecal Injection of Tranexamic Acid: A Case Report and Long-Term Follow-Up and Narrative Review.Case reports in anesthesiology · 2026Article
- Rethinking the electrographical boundaries of status epilepticus: controversies and paradoxes of the ictal-interictal continuum.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe aimed to investigate timing of occurrence of peri-ictal MRI abnormalities - a potential risk biomarker of status epilepticus-related cerebral injury (t2).
methodsThis prospective study enrolled adult patients with status epilepticus and acute magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); patients with peri-ictal MRI abnormalities underwent follow-up MRI 4 weeks later. Predictive model, using logistic regression, integrated clinical factors (duration, semiology, and etiology of status epilepticus and the patients' level of consciousness) to prognosticate occurrence of peri-ictal MRI abnormalities. Cerebral injury due to status epilepticus was assessed by comparative volumetric analysis of acute and follow-up MRIs.
resultsAmong 256 patients, 137 (53%) had peri-ictal MRI abnormalities. The likelihood of their occurrence increased over time under the influence of semiology and etiology of status epilepticus as well as the patients' level of consciousness: it was highest in non-convulsive status epilepticus caused by acute primary or secondary etiologies at 10 minutes after onset in patients with stupor/coma (81-85%); it increased at 24 hours to 92%; and at 48 hours to 95%. Conversely, in alert/somnolent patients with prominent motor symptoms and acute triggering factors associated with epilepsy, the possibility of developing peri-ictal MRI abnormalities at 24 hours was 4 to 5% and at 48 hours it was 6 to 11%. In 28 of 45 (62%) of follow-up MRIs, structural long-term consequences of status epilepticus were observed in the form of either cortical and hippocampal atrophy or global cerebral volume loss.
interpretationIn this novel multimodal approach based on MRI data, the patients' level of consciousness, etiology, and duration of status epilepticus offers insights into the risk of possible brain injury in status epilepticus. ANN NEUROL 2026;99:523-534.
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.