ReviewAnnals of neurology2026
Revisiting Incomplete Tissue-Level Reperfusion Following Successful Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke.
Review 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 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.
- Refining reperfusion assessment with flat-panel detector CT: association with final infarct volume after endovascular thrombectomy.European stroke journal · 2026Article
- When recanalization is not reperfusion: The no-reflow challenge in stroke.Surgical neurology international · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Among patients with acute ischemic stroke achieving successful large vessel recanalization (defined as expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction [eTICI ≥2b]), incomplete tissue-level reperfusion, distinct from visually identifiable distal occlusion on digital-subtraction angiography, remains a significant challenge. Persistent tissue-level hypoperfusion, identified on post-thrombectomy perfusion imaging, involves complex pathophysiology comprising 2 primary mechanisms: territorial hypoperfusion, stemming from distal emboli that often manifest after eTICI 2b to 2c or a posteriori with eTICI 3 recanalization, obstructing small distal arterial branches and forming wedge-shaped patterns; and hypoperfusion within the ischemic core, potentially representing capillary no-reflow, a phenomenon of microvascular perfusion failure despite successful macrovascular recanalization well described in the preclinical literature. Such pathophysiological differences have driven inconsistent designations, causing reported incomplete tissue-level reperfusion rate to vary widely (0-42.5%) even in angiographically complete (eTICI 3) recanalization. Further clouding the scene, territorial hypoperfusion may spontaneously reverse within 24 hours (termed "delayed reperfusion"), yet a distinct delayed hypoperfusion can affect necrotic tissue regardless of no-reflow. Whereas persistent hypoperfusion is significantly associated with functional outcomes, the functional impact of true no-reflow remains unclear. Recent positive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of intra-arterial thrombolysis after successful recanalization offer a promising therapeutic strategy. However, these trials lacked perfusion imaging, whereas the larger functional benefit in patients achieving eTICI 2b suggests intra-arterial thrombolysis likely acted on distal emboli rather than true microvascular dysfunction. Regarding microvascular dysfunction, preclinical findings highlight potential therapeutic strategies such as targeting pericyte constriction or inflammatory responses, that warrant clinical translation. This review synthesizes current evidence on the mechanisms, assessment methods, and therapeutic strategies for addressing incomplete tissue-level reperfusion following thrombectomy. Further research is warranted to establish standardized definitions, develop targeted therapies for both territorial hypoperfusion and true no-reflow, and translate promising preclinical findings into effective clinical interventions. ANN NEUROL 2026;99:668-683.
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.