ArticleNeuroradiology2026
Baseline imaging for determining infarct core in patients with acute ischemic stroke: noncontrast computed tomography vs computed tomography perfusion.
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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the value of noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT) and computed tomography perfusion (CTP) in determining the infarct core in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS).
methodsFour hundred and forty-nine AIS patients who underwent baseline NCCT and CTP assessment, endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) and follow-up imaging evaluation from October 2019 to August 2023 were retrospectively enrolled. Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (ASPECTS) were assessed on baseline NCCT, cerebral blood flow (CBF) colored map and follow-up imaging. Baseline infarct core volume was calculated as regions with reduction in the relative CBF < 30% of that in contralateral normal tissue. "NCCT-CTP mismatch" was defined as low ASPECTS (< 6) with small infarct core (< 70 ml) (LASC), or high ASPECTS (≥ 6) with large infarct core (≥ 70 ml) (HALC).
results"NCCT-CTP mismatch" was found in 145 (32.3%) patients, and 35.9% of them achieved good outcomes after EVT. IVT using before CTP imaging (OR, 1.833; P = 0.005) and higher admission NIHSS (OR, 1.055; P < 0.001) were independently associated with "NCCT-CTP mismatch". LASC patients exhibited longer stroke onset time [median, 306 min vs. 125 min; P = 0.004] and higher rate of hemorrhagic infarction (33.1% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.077) after EVT than HALC patients. Compared with CBF map, stronger correlations of deep basal ganglia regional infarct were found between baseline NCCT and follow-up imaging for both early and late presenters (all P < 0.05).
conclusionsAbout 30% patients showed "NCCT-CTP mismatch", and 35.9% of them achieved good outcome. Despite NCCT showing stronger correlations, CTP could provide complementary information to NCCT, therefore both were suggested in future practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42118241What 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.