ReviewBiomolecules2026
Beyond Recanalization: Neurovascular Unit Protection and Precision Adjunctive Therapy for Ischemic Stroke in the Reperfusion Era.
Review in Biomolecules, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) have increased large-vessel recanalization in acute ischemic stroke, yet macrovascular reopening does not ensure tissue reperfusion or functional recovery. Microvascular no-reflow, blood-brain barrier failure, oxidative injury, thromboinflammation, edema, and hemorrhagic transformation sustain a recanalization-to-recovery gap. Classical neuroprotection failed because of mismatches in models, timing, brain exposure, patient selection, and endpoints, and because ischemic injury was reduced to a single neuronal pathway. Cerebroprotection in the reperfusion era should target the neurovascular unit: delaying penumbral collapse before recanalization, limiting oxidative and vascular injury during thrombectomy, and restoring microcirculatory and barrier function afterwards. Recent trials show a differentiated landscape. ESCAPE-NEXT and RODIN were neutral; TASTE-2 suggested a borderline overall effect and imaging-defined heterogeneity for edaravone dexborneol; BAST supported potential benefit from butylphthalide; and the positive EMPHASIS trial contrasted with neutral EVT-specific MIST-A findings for minocycline. We organize mechanisms and interventions along the macrovascular recanalization-tissue reperfusion-neurovascular-unit preservation-functional recovery continuum, stratify evidence across pharmacological, physiological, delivery, natural-product, and cell/extracellular-vesicle strategies, and propose a precision framework integrating tissue and target windows, reperfusion status, and measurable treatment response. Next-generation trials should combine target engagement, imaging enrichment, prespecified biomarker interactions, and adaptive designs. Current evidence supports redesigning cerebroprotection, not adopting any candidate as a universal adjunct to reperfusion.
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.