Abstract 042: Cognitive outcomes in patients with carotid insufficiency after undergoing direct extracranial‐intracranial bypass
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Extracranial‐intracranial (EC‐IC) bypass is a niche procedure that has been selectively used for flow augmentation or flow restoration in patients with intracranial carotid insufficiency.1 The underlying etiology varies but is most commonly related to Moya Moya disease (MMD) or intracranial carotid atherosclerotic disease (ICAD).2 Patients are often managed non‐operatively until they begin to develop symptoms such as transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) or strokes that are recalcitrant to maximal medical management, at which point bypass is pursued.1 This lag period, however, could put patients at risk for long term deficit, not only in the form of focal neurological deficits but also in terms of overall neurocognitive capability.3 Several reports have previously demonstrated some level of association between EC‐IC bypass and neurocognitive outcomes, though in isolated populations of either MMD or ICAD.4,5 We therefore aim to further assess the relationship between EC‐IC bypass and neurocognitive outcomes in patients with intracranial carotid insufficiency. Methods Patients ages 18 years and up undergoing EC‐IC bypass were identified from a single institution database between January 2020 and December 2021. Patient records were reviewed for demographic data including age and sex, as well as preoperative clinical information including comorbidities, operative indication, anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy usage, prior ischemic stroke, modified Rankin score (mRS), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) score. Radiographic data was also collected including Suzuki grade, collateralization, and perfusion. Post‐operative clinical information including complications, discharge mRS, and discharge MOCA scores were identified. Follow‐up duration, MOCA scores, and mRS were also identified and recorded. Results Of the forty‐four patients that underwent EC‐IC bypass during the specified period, ten had cognitive assessments before and after surgery available for review. The indications for bypass in these cases were ICA steno‐occlusive disease resulting in strokes despite maximal medical management in 9 cases, and MMD in one case. Suzuki grade was IV in the MMD case. Pial collaterals were present in 7 cases, and ECA collaterals were present in 5. Prior ischemic strokes were present in 8 cases, with a preoperative mRS range from 1‐4 (median 1), and average MOCA of 20. Perfusion imaging demonstrated a Tmax mismatch in eight cases, with an average volume of 73.6 cc at risk. All patients underwent direct superficial temporal artery to middle cerebral artery bypass, with additional encephaloduroarteriomyosynangiosis (EDAMS). Follow up MOCA score was improved in 8 cases, unchanged in one case, and worsened in one case (average MOCA increased from 20 to 23). Follow up mRS ranged from 0‐2. Additionally, CT perfusion demonstrated notable improvements in Tmax >4 seconds (decrease from 176 cc to 110 cc), Tmax >6 seconds (decrease from 59 cc to 29 cc), and mismatch (decrease from 59 cc to 17 cc) at 6 month follow up. Conclusion Patients with carotid insufficiency from MMD or ICAD undergoing EC‐IC bypass demonstrate well below normal preoperative MOCA scores. This is suggestive of ongoing neurocognitive decline, which is an often overlooked issue in patients with these pathologies. MOCA and mRS both appear to improve in patients after bypass at longer term follow‐up, suggesting that bypass may be an effective method of addressing the issue of neurocognitive decline in patients with carotid insufficiency.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».