ArticleNeuroradiology2026
Follow-up imaging after hospital discharge for acute intracerebral hemorrhage in European academic hospitals: a decision-making analysis.
Article in Neuroradiology, 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate factors guiding follow-up imaging after hospital discharge in atraumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) across large European academic centers and compare decision-making patterns using a standardized approach.
methodsExpert neuroradiologists from nine European centers in eight countries detailed their follow-up algorithms for deep and lobar ICH, specifying (1) patient-related decision criteria, (2) preferred imaging modalities, and (3) advised follow-up timing. Free-text and schematic inputs were harmonized into uniform decision trees, mapping recommended modalities (CT, MRI/MRA, DSA, CTA) to patient-factor constellations. The primary endpoint was the distribution of recommended strategies; the secondary endpoint was inter-center consensus (≥ 50% agreement).
resultsKey decision criteria were hemorrhage location, suspected structural macrovascular pathology (SMVP), age, hypertension, and small-vessel disease. MRI/MRA was recommended by all centers and appeared in nearly all decision branches; “no further imaging” was rare. Additional strategies variably combined MRI/MRA with DSA and/or CTA, whereas stand-alone DSA as first follow-up test was uncommon. Formal consensus was achieved in a minority of clinical scenarios, most consistently for deep ICH, where MRI/MRA reached around 60% support. In young patients with lobar ICH and suspected SMVP, no single strategy reached consensus. The most frequently proposed timepoint for follow-up imaging was 6–12 weeks after discharge.
conclusionIn current European practice, MRI/MRA at 6–12 weeks represents the predominant follow-up strategy after ICH discharge, with CTA ± DSA added when SMVP is suspected. Despite this MRI-centered pattern, substantial inter-center heterogeneity persists, underscoring the need for standardized follow-up imaging with clearly defined timelines and protocols.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41779161What 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.