ArticleScientific reports2026
Preliminary analysis of long-term prognosis outcomes of modified extracranial-intracranial bypass reconstruction for adult ischemic moyamoya disease.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This retrospective cohort study compared long-term outcomes between modified extracranial-intracranial bypass (mECIC) and encephalo-duro-arterio-myo-synangiosis (EDAMS) in adults with ischemic moyamoya disease. Among 50 patients analyzed (mECIC: n = 18; EDAMS: n = 32), the mECIC group demonstrated better neurological recovery, with 88.9% achieving functional independence (mRS ≤ 2) versus 62.5% in the EDAMS group (p = 0.018) at 60-month follow-up. Cognitive performance, assessed by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), showed greater improvement in the mECIC cohort (ΔMoCA: +8.2 ± 1.5 vs. + 5.1 ± 1.2 points; p < 0.001), accompanied by more pronounced hemodynamic restoration including higher cerebral blood flow (46.32 ± 6.70 vs. 40.19 ± 5.72 mL/100 g/min; p = 0.003) and greater flow augmentation (ΔCBF: +18.09 ± 9.32 vs. + 12.05 ± 6.77 mL/100 g/min; p = 0.02). The mECIC procedure was associated with longer stroke-free survival (HR = 3.48; p = 0.03). The mECIC revascularization, associated with improved long-term outcomes, may represent a valuable therapeutic approach for the long-term management of ischemic moyamoya disease in adults.
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.