ArticleNeurology and therapy2026
Oral Nimodipine in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Critical Propensity Score-Matched Reevaluation in a Contemporary Cohort.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 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
introductionOral nimodipine is recommended as standard therapy for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) based on trials from the 1980s. Given major advances in aneurysm treatment and neuro-intensive care, its effectiveness in contemporary settings warrants reevaluation.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients with aSAH treated between 2015 and 2025. Clinical, radiological, and outcome data were extracted from medical records. Patients receiving prophylactic oral nimodipine (Nimo+) were compared with those who did not (Nimo-). Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to balance baseline characteristics. Primary outcome was neurological function at discharge and at 3 months, assessed with the Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS). Secondary outcomes included angiographic vasospasm, cerebral infarction, and mortality.
resultsOf the 312 patients eligible for inclusion in this study, 102 received oral nimodipine and 210 did not. After PSM, 102 patients were included per group with no differences in baseline characteristics. Nimodipine was associated with lower rates of angiographic vasospasm (43% vs 64%; p < 0.001) and delayed infarction (38% vs 58%; p = 0.008) and with better GOS score at discharge (p = 0.047) and at 3 months (p = 0.008). Mortality did not differ between the two groups. Subgroup analysis showed benefits in terms of angiographic vasospasm, infarction, and functional outcome among patients receiving nimodipine ≥ 14 days, whereas shorter administration only reduced angiographic vasospasm.
conclusionIn this contemporary propensity score-matched cohort, oral nimodipine therapy reduced vasospasm and delayed infarction and improved neurological outcome without having an impact on mortality. Sustained administration for at least 14 days appears to be crucial to achieve benefit, favoring full-course nimodipine therapy in aSAH management.
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.