ArticleEye (London, England)2026
Retinal ischemic perivascular lesions in cortical cerebral infarction: a comparison against controls.
Article in Eye (London, England), 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesRetinal ischemic perivascular lesions (RIPLs), identified on optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging, represent focal retinal infarcts. RIPLs have been linked to stroke, but not specifically cortical ischemic infarctions. Main study questions: Do RIPL counts differ among controls, pre-stroke patients, and post-stroke patients? SUBJECTS/
methodsRetrospective, cross-sectional, single institution study of 65 identified patients consenting for research who had both high-quality, bilateral, 6 mm × 6 mm macular optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging performed within five years of cortical ischemic infarction occurrence and 65 controls who had a coronary artery calcium (CAC) score of 0 within 1 year following baseline OCT. The differences in mean total RIPLs among pre-stroke, post-stroke, and controls groups were assessed, as were differences by stroke circulation (anterior vs. posterior) and laterality (ipsilateral vs. contralateral eye). The effects of potential confounders (known cardiovascular risk factors) were examined with multivariate analysis.
results129 patients [controls:65; pre-stroke:27; post-stroke:37 (anterior:17; posterior:20)] were included. Pre-stroke and post-stroke patients have significantly higher RIPL counts compared to controls (mean ± std: controls, 2.05 ± 2.41; pre-stroke, 3.39 ± 3.55; post-stroke, 3.62 ± 4.14; p = 0.03). No differences were identified between pre- and post-stroke patients, anterior and posterior circulation, and ipsilateral and contralateral eyes. Multivariate analyses identified no statistically significant association between RIPL counts and post-stroke patients compared to controls.
conclusionsPre- and post-stroke patients exhibit higher RIPL counts versus controls, without differences between anterior- and posterior-circulation strokes or ipsilateral and contralateral eyes. In cortical stroke, RIPLs likely indicate chronic microvascular dysfunction from baseline cardiovascular risk factors, not acute stroke-associated changes.
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.