Cited by 183Cerebrovascular and genetic disordersBarrier Structure and Function StudiesIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research

Blood-brain barrier permeability and long term clinical and imaging outcomes in cerebral small vessel disease

Open access
Wardlaw, Joanna M., Doubal, Fergus N., Valdes-Hernandez, Maria, Wang, Xin, Chappell, Francesca M., Shuler, Kirsten, Armitage, Paul A., Carpenter, Trevor C. +1 more·2013·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose—: Increased blood–brain barrier (BBB) permeability occurs in cerebral small vessel disease. It is not known if BBB changes predate progression of small vessel disease. Methods—: We followed-up patients with nondisabling lacunar or cortical stroke and BBB permeability magnetic resonance imaging after their original stroke. Approximately 3 years later, we assessed functional outcome (Oxford Handicap Score, poor outcome defined as 3–6), recurrent neurological events, and white matter hyperintensity (WMH) progression on magnetic resonance imaging. Results—: Among 70 patients with mean age of 68 (SD±11) years, median time to clinical follow-up was 39 months (interquartile range, 30–45) and median Oxford Handicap Score was 2 (interquartile range, 1–3); poor functional outcome was associated with higher baseline WMH score ( P <0.001) and increased basal ganglia BBB permeability ( P =0.046). Among 48 patients with follow-up magnetic resonance imaging, WMH progression at follow-up was associated with baseline WMH (ANCOVA P <0.0001) and age (ANCOVA P =0.032). Conclusions—: Further long-term studies to evaluate the role of BBB dysfunction in progression of small vessel disease are required in studies that are large enough to account for key prognostic influences such as baseline WMH and age.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/strokeaha.112.669994

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Evidence for endothelial dysfunction in SVD comes from CADASIL, a hereditary SVD caused by Notch3 mutations, where extensive WMH are associated with increased brain volume on MRI suggesting increased brain water content, and CSF/plasma albumin ratios are increased, consistent with BBB failure.

    “Evidence for endothelial dysfunction in SVD also comes from CADASIL, a hereditary SVD caused by Notch3 mutations,146 where extensive WMH were associated with increased brain volume on MRI suggesting an increase of brain water content147 and CSF/plasma albumin ratios were increased,148 in keeping with BBB failure.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wardlaw, J. M., Doubal, F. N., Valdes-Hernandez, M., Wang, X., Chappell, F. M., Shuler, K., Armitage, P. A., Carpenter, T. C., & Dennis, M. S.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • From the Brain Research Imaging Center (J.M.W., F.N.D., M.V.H., X.W., F.M.C., K.S., P.A.A., T.C.C.), and Stroke Medicine (J.M.W., F.N.D.,M.S.D.), Division of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom; Scottish Imaging Network, A Platform for Scientific Excellence (SINAPSE) Collaboration, Edinburgh, United Kingdom (J.M.W., M.V.H., X.W., F.M.C., K.S., P.A.A., T.C.C.); and Center for Cognitive Aging and Cognitive Epidemiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United...
Venue
Stroke
Published
2013-02
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
525-527
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2167086724
Cited by
183
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (075611)
  • Mrs Gladys Row Fogo Charitable Trust
  • Research Councils UK
  • Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K026992/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Cerebrovascular and genetic disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Intracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Keywords
blood-brain barrier permeability, cerebral small vessel disease, white matter hyperintensities, white matter hyperintensity progression, lacunar stroke, cortical stroke, functional outcome, basal ganglia, prognostic factors
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Blood-Brain Barrier, Capillary Permeability, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Cerebral Small Vessel Diseases

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review