ArticleStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2025
Blood Biomarkers for Large Vessel Occlusions: A Systematic Review.
Article in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of stroke blood biomarker data highlights need for more translational research methods.Nature communications · 2026Pooled it
- High-specificity identification of large vessel occlusion stroke using D-dimer and NT-proBNP combined with clinical variables.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLarge vessel occlusions (LVOs), which account for approximately 25% of ischemic strokes, pose a significant challenge due to their severe impact and need for rapid diagnosis and treatment. Current diagnostic approaches-primarily based on clinical scales and imaging-often lack specificity or delay treatment, severely impacting patient outcomes. This review aims to evaluate the potential of blood biomarkers in improving the accuracy and efficiency of LVO diagnosis.
methodsA systematic review adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were conducted with specific inclusion/exclusion criteria and multiperson screening. PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase were searched using targeted queries related to LVO and biomarkers. Studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of blood biomarkers for LVO were included. Data were extracted and synthesized to categorize biomarkers and assess their diagnostic utility.
resultsSixteen studies were included, categorizing biomarkers into 5 groups: coagulation and hemostasis, acute brain injury, inflammatory, angiogenic growth factors, and metabolic and structural markers.
conclusionsThe review highlights the critical role of biomarker blood testing to enhance LVO diagnosis, especially in acute clinical settings. Coagulation and hemostasis markers such as D-dimer offer rapid thrombus detection, and acute brain injury and angiogenic biomarkers provide insight into the extent of injury, localization, and vascular response. A combination of biomarkers from multiple categories is needed to provide an accurate clinical picture of LVO in patients. Excluding studies on embolic strokes, including cardioembolic subtypes, may also bias findings by neglecting their distinct biomarker profiles, warranting further investigation to fully assess biomarker utility across stroke etiologies. Despite promising results for multiple biomarkers, including glial fibrillary acidic protein, ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase-L1, and D-dimer, further research is needed to validate these biomarkers in diverse populations and integrate them into clinical practice effectively.
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.