ArticleNeurology2025
Association of Increased Central Arterial Stiffness With BBB Disruption in Patients With Reversible Cerebral Vasoconstriction Syndrome.
Article in Neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Blood-brain barrier integrity and brain entropy in reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome.The journal of headache and pain · 2026Article
- Substrate stiffness and cellular microenvironment regulate cell and junction mechanics in iPSC-derived brain microvascular endothelial cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesBlood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption was found to be critical in the pathogenesis of reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS). We hypothesized that increased central arterial stiffness, resulting in the excessive transmission of central pulsatile flow to the dysregulated cerebral microcirculation, may contribute to the disruption of BBB.
methodsThis is a cross-sectional study. Participants with RCVS in the acute phase were recruited from both outpatient and inpatient settings between January 2018 and September 2020. The diagnosis was established based on clinical presentations and neuroradiologic evidence. Age-matched and sex-matched healthy controls (HCs) were recruited from nearby communities. Patients with RCVS were recruited and underwent 3-dimensional isotropic contrast-enhanced T2 fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging to visualize BBB disruption. The central arterial stiffness was assessed with hemodynamic parameters such as carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), carotid augmentation index (cAI), and central blood pressure (ceBP). Arterial stiffness was compared between patients with RCVS and HCs, and between patients with RCVS with and without BBB disruption.
resultsSixty-five patients with RCVS (mean age 44.3 ± 9.6 years; 42 women) and 65 HCs (mean age 45.4 ± 8.9 years; 42 women) completed the study. Among the patients with RCVS, 33 exhibited imaging-proven BBB disruption. Those with BBB disruption were older (48.3 ± 9.2 vs 40.2 ± 8.3 years, DISCUSSION: Our study confirmed increased central arterial stiffness in patients with RCVS, especially among those with BBB disruption. These findings suggest a potential contribution of central arterial stiffness and excessive pulsatile flow to cerebral microvascular dysfunction in the pathogenesis of RCVS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.