MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4367305498 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000203315

A Weighted Cortical ASPECTS Compared Against Total ASPECTS in Outcome Prediction of Anterior Large Vessel Occlusion Thrombectomy (S24.007)

2023· article· en· W4367305498 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pratit Patel, Manisha Koneru, Mary Penckofer, Jane Khalife, Renato Oliveira, Mohamad Abdalkader, Piers Klein, Nicholas Vigilante, kamen Scott, Ajith J. Thomas, James E. Siegler

Notice bibliographique

RevueNeurology · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternal carotid arteryOcclusionStroke (engine)Receiver operating characteristicModified Rankin ScaleCohortCardiologyInternal medicineRadiologySurgeryIschemic strokeIschemia

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objective: Compare outcome prediction using Cortical Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score(ASPECTS) against total ASPECTS, in large vessel occlusion strokes undergoing Thrombectomy. Background: The 10-point ASPECTS accounts for subcortical structures that may be more likely to infarct and differentially associated with long-term outcomes when compared to injured cortical regions. More specific, cortically-weighted 7-point ASPECTS score could more accurately predict long-term functional outcomes following successful recanalization. Design/Methods: Registry data from 2 Comprehensive Stroke Centers(site 1:2016–2021; site 2:2019–2021) including patients with M1 or internal carotid artery(ICA) occlusions who underwent thrombectomy were consolidated for analysis. The primary outcome was a shift in 90-day modified Rankin(mRS), which was adjusted a priori for age, pre-stroke mRS, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, M1 versus internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion, and successful recanalization(TICI 2b/3). The training model of 10-point ASPECTS(tASPECTS) vs. 7-point cortical-weighted ASPECTS(cASPECTS) was generated in site 1 and validated in site 2, with models compared using receiver operator characteristics(ROC) and corrected Akaike’s Information Criterion(AICc). Results: Of 328 included patients (site 1/training cohort=181; site 2/validation=147), median age was 71y(IQR 61.25–82), of whom 119(36.28%) had ICA occlusion, with a median tASPECTS of 9(IQR 8–10) and median cASPECTS of 6(IQR 5–7). In derivation cohort for the cASPECTS, multi-class adjusted ROC curves were generated, with areas under the curve (AUC) for predicting mRS shift ranging from 0.8546–0.9110(AICc=690.078, r^2=0.5936). In validation cohort, the misclassification rate was 71.6%, however, when expanded for flexibility(+/−1 mRS unit), model classifies validation site data correctly 55.8% of time. In training cohort for the tASPECTS, the AUC for predicted mRS classes ranged from 0.8812–0.9250(AICc=693.646, r^2=0.6165), with no difference in model performance against cASPECTS (p=0.14). In validation cohort, the misclassification rate was 73.47%, and improved to 50.3% correct when expanded for flexibility(+/−1 mRS unit). Conclusions: The cASPECTS and tASPECTS were similarly predictive of 90-day mRS scores following successful recanalization. Disclosure: Dr. Patel has nothing to disclose. Ms. Koneru has nothing to disclose. Ms. Penckofer has nothing to disclose. Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Vesalio. Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $0-$499 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for NIH. Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Avania. Dr. Nguyen has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as an Editor, Associate Editor, or Editorial Advisory Board Member for AHA. The institution of Dr. Nguyen has received research support from Boston Medical Center. The institution of Dr. Nguyen has received research support from Society of Vascular and Interventional Neurology. Dr. Khalife has nothing to disclose. Dr. Oliveira has nothing to disclose. Mohamad Abdalkader has nothing to disclose. Mr. Klein has nothing to disclose. Mr. Vigilante has nothing to disclose. Scott Kamen has nothing to disclose. Dr. Thomas has received personal compensation for serving as an employee of Cooper Univeristy Health Care. Dr. Thomas has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Stryker. Dr. Thomas has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for Medtronic. Dr. Thomas has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving as a Consultant for CereVasc. Dr. Siegler has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving as a Consultant for Ceribell. Dr. Siegler has received personal compensation in the range of $10,000-$49,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for AstraZeneca.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,050

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,011
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,003
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,280
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueNeurology→Même sujetAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→Travaux en français237 207→