ArticleNeurosurgical review2026
Development and validation of a risk prediction model for cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome after revascularization in adult moyamoya disease.
Article in Neurosurgical review, 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
To identify risk factors for cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS) following revascularization surgery in adult moyamoya disease (MMD) patients and to develop and validate a corresponding risk prediction model. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and CNKI for studies on CHS risk factors post-revascularization in adult MMD. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. Significant risk factors from the meta-analysis were used to construct a logistic regression model. For clinical validation, 120 eligible patients from a tertiary neurosurgical center were enrolled (March–October 2025). The model's discrimination and calibration were evaluated. Fifteen studies involving 1,968 patients were included. The pooled CHS incidence was 23% (95% CI: 0.17–0.30), with significant heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 94%). Meta-analysis identified four independent risk factors: left-side surgery (OR = 4.08, 95% CI: 2.69–6.19, P < 0.001), advanced Suzuki stage (OR = 4.06, 95% CI: 2.02–8.17, P < 0.001), concomitant hypertension (OR = 5.38, 95% CI: 3.44–8.41, P < 0.001), and hemorrhagic onset type (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 1.47–6.97, P = 0.003). The prediction model was: logit(P) = -1.046 + 1.406 × (surgical side) + 1.401 × (Suzuki stage) + 1.682 × (hypertension) + 1.163 × (onset type). In the validation cohort (CHS incidence 25.83%), the model showed an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.808 (95% CI: 0.724, 0.885). The optimal cutoff probability was 0.70, determined by maximizing Youden's index (0.529), at which the model demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.742 and a specificity of 0.787. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test indicated good calibration (χ2 = 6.037, P = 0.643). An evidence-based risk prediction model for CHS after revascularization in adult MMD was developed and validated, demonstrating good predictive performance. This model may assist in early risk stratification and personalized perioperative management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42010015What 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.