The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk of stroke and recurrent dissection after a cervical artery dissection: A multicenter study
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the risk of stroke, TIA, or dissection recurrence after a first event of cervical artery dissection (CAD). METHODS: The authors undertook a historical cohort study of consecutive patients with a first event of CAD who were admitted in 24 departments of neurology within a period of at least 1 year. Patients were retrospectively selected from a stroke data bank or from the local administrative data bank using the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases. A neurologist and a radiologist reviewed all charts to validate diagnosis and collect data. In 2002, patients were interviewed by phone or during a visit by the local investigators. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-nine patients (mean age 44.0 +/- 9.7 years) were included in the study. Among the 457 survivors, 25 (5.5%) could not be contacted in 2002 because they had moved. After a mean follow-up of 31 months, four (0.9%) patients presented a recurrent ischemic stroke attributable to either not yet completely recovered initial CAD (n = 2) or a recurrent CAD (n = 2). Eight (1.8%) patients had a TIA without CAD recurrence. Two TIA occurred at the acute stage of CAD. Of the six remaining TIA, only one was associated with chronic arterial stenosis. In addition, two patients had recurrent CAD without stroke, giving a total of four (0.9%) CAD recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a first event of CAD have a very low risk of ischemic events or dissection recurrences. Ischemic events seem rarely to be in relation with chronic arterial lesions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Kernan, W. N., Ovbiagele, B., Black, H. R., Bravata, D. M., Chimowitz, M. I., Ezekowitz, M. D., Fang, M. C., Fisher, M., Furie, K. L., Heck, D. V., et al. (2014) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/str.0000000000000024 · Cited by 5,170
Sacco, R. L., Adams, R., Albers, G., Alberts, M. J., Benavente, O., Furie, K., Goldstein, L. B., Gorelick, P., Halperin, J., Harbaugh, R., et al. (2006) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/01.str.0000199147.30016.74 · Cited by 1,873
Roach, E. S., Golomb, M. R., Adams, R., Biller, J., Daniels, S., deVeber, G., Ferriero, D., Jones, B. V., Kirkham, F. J., Scott, R. M., et al. (2008) · Stroke · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.108.189696 · Cited by 963
Cervical-artery dissections: predisposing factors, diagnosis, and outcome
Debette, S., & Leys, D. (2009) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(09)70084-5 · Cited by 833
(2015) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(15)70018-9 · Cited by 503
Metadata
- Authors
- Touzé, E., Gauvrit, J.-Y., Moulin, T., Meder, J.-F., Bracard, S., & Mas, J.-L.
- Venue
- Neurology
- Published
- 2003-11-25
- Volume
- 61
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1347-1351
- ISSN
- 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-632X
- OpenAlex
- W2115157015
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk of stroke and recurrent dissection after a cervical artery dissection: A multicenter study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1212/01.wnl.0000094325.95097.86
- The paper
- Touzé, E., Gauvrit, J.-Y., Moulin, T., Meder, J.-F., Bracard, S., & Mas, J.-L. (2003). Risk of stroke and recurrent dissection after a cervical artery dissection: A multicenter study. Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000094325.95097.86
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.