Trial reportFrontiers in pharmacology2026
Efficacy and safety of anisodine hydrobromide injection in acute ischemic stroke-a multicenter real-world observational study.
Trial report in Frontiers in pharmacology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anisodine hydrobromide injection in patients with acute ischemic stroke in a real-world clinical setting. Design: Multicenter, real-world observational cohort study conducted from April 2018 to December 2021 with 90-day follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) were applied. Participants: A total of 4,179 patients aged ≥18 years with acute ischemic stroke admitted within 30 days of onset were included; 2,120 received anisodine hydrobromide and 2,059 received best medical treatment. Exposure: Intravenous anisodine hydrobromide injection administered as part of routine clinical care. Outcomes: The primary outcome was unfavorable functional outcome (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] 3-6) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included overall mRS distribution, changes in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores, hemorrhagic transformation, and 90-day mortality or recurrent stroke. Results: Unfavorable functional outcome occurred in 14.3% (282/2,120) of the anisodine group versus 20.6% (396/2059) of controls (adjusted OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.74). IPTW analysis confirmed the result (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51-0.80). The anisodine group had a more favorable mRS distribution (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61-0.77) and greater NIHSS improvement (mean ΔNIHSS difference = -0.61; 95% CI, -0.79 to -0.43). Hemorrhagic transformation, mortality, and recurrent stroke did not differ significantly between groups. Conclusion: In this large multicenter cohort conducted in China, anisodine hydrobromide showed a potential association with improved 90-day functional outcomes, with no clear increase in adverse events among patients with acute ischemic stroke. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier ChiCTR1900027517.
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.