ArticleBrain and behavior2026
Clinical Spectrum of Reversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome With and Without Angiographic Vasoconstriction: A Retrospective Study of 84 Hospitalized Patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether patients with reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS) without demonstrable vasoconstriction differ clinically from those with angiographically confirmed vasoconstriction.
methodsWe retrospectively studied consecutive patients with RCVS hospitalized at a tertiary headache center in Japan between February 2011 and March 2026. Patients were classified according to the presence or absence of angiographically demonstrable vasoconstriction on magnetic resonance angiography. Demographic characteristics, clinical features, surrogate markers of disease severity, treatment patterns, triggering factors, neuroimaging abnormalities, and outcomes were compared between groups.
resultsEighty-four patients were included: 61 with demonstrable vasoconstriction and 23 without. The two groups did not differ significantly in age (median, 51 vs. 53 years; p = 0.213), female predominance (80% vs. 78%; p = 1.000), or migraine history (59% vs. 57%; p = 1.000). Clinical features were similar, including the number of thunderclap headache episodes (median, 4 vs. 4; p = 0.577) and the interval from the first to the last thunderclap headache (median, 6 vs. 6 days; p = 0.460). Time to hospitalization, length of hospital stay, calcium channel blocker use (98% vs. 100%; p = 1.000), neuroimaging abnormalities (8% vs. 9%; p = 1.000), and persistent neurological sequelae (2% vs. 0%; p = 1.000) were also comparable.
conclusionPatients without demonstrable vasoconstriction exhibited clinical characteristics, severity indicators, management, and outcomes similar to those with confirmed vasoconstriction. These findings suggest that the two groups may share a common clinical spectrum; however, confirmation in larger prospective studies is warranted.
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.