ReviewEuropean radiology2026
The multiverse of mismatchness in neuroradiology for stroke assessment: a narrative review.
Review in European radiology, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mismatch imaging has become a key concept in neuroradiology, offering valuable insights into the pathophysiology of cerebrovascular and oncological conditions. By highlighting discrepancies between neuroimaging parameters, mismatch-based algorithms have revolutionized diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient prognosis. In stroke-related clinical scenarios, the mismatch concept is now essential in identifying candidates for thrombolysis or estimating the stroke onset time. However, the increasing use of mismatched terminology can lead to confusion, particularly when the exact mismatch target or required imaging modalities are unclear. Concerning stroke evaluation, there is a wide range of computed tomography perfusion (CT) maps and MRI sequences that are currently used for describing and determining mismatch concepts. Apart from the well-known penumbra-core mismatch related to CTP, the combination of features of different MRI sequences has provided a wide range of mismatch scenarios, such as perfusion-weighted imaging (PWI)/diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) mismatch, magnetic resonance angiography (MRA)/DWI mismatch, susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI)/DWI mismatch, or the DWI/FLAIR mismatch. Each one of these mismatches has its own clinical and physiopathological meaning, ranging from time-to-onset stroke estimation to selection of endovascular procedures. This article explores the different mismatch concepts used for stroke evaluation, including other related, less-used ones, focusing on their underlying physiopathology, clinical relevance, and supporting scientific evidence, all from a practical and educational perspective. KEY POINTS: Question Mismatch imaging offers transformative diagnostic insights in stroke, yet consistent definitions and standardized methodologies are essential to fully realize its clinical potential. Findings Our study reviews mismatch paradigms, outlines their pathophysiological basis, and compares clinical implications, highlighting critical limitations and the need for standardized imaging methodologies. Clinical relevance Standardizing mismatch imaging enhances diagnostic accuracy, optimizes patient selection for therapies, and improves prognostic assessment, ultimately enabling more consistent and reliable clinical decision-making in stroke.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41593382What 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.