Abstract 474: The Prevalence and Evolution of Cognitive Deficits in Chronic Subdural Hematoma Patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction / Purpose Chronic subdural hematomas (cSDH) represent the most common form of intracranial hemorrhage in the elderly, with an estimated incidence ranging from 2 to 21 cases per 100,000 individuals. Although the incidence has increased over the past decade, the specific effects of cSDH on various domains of cognitive function remain inadequately characterized. In light of these gaps in the literature, the present study was aimed to assess cognitive performance of patients with cSDH at two distinct time points during treatment to better delineate the trajectory of cognitive outcomes in this population. Materials / Methods Patients with a diagnosis of cSDH treated at our institution were enrolled and prospectively followed during the study period from August 2024 until August of 2025. We successfully administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Controlled Oral Word Association (COWA) in 27 patients prior to the initiation of standard of care procedures. Of these patients, 5 underwent the examination at two time points: before undergoing a standard of care intervention (craniotomy, MMA embolization, medication management) and at 3 ‐ 6 months (+/ ‐ 3 weeks) following the date of treatment. In addition, 7 more patients were enrolled, and one assessment was performed with a second one expected to be completed at the time of conference presentation. Additional information such as thickness of the hematoma, information regarding baseline level of cognitive functioning, and radiographic appearance of the hematoma were also collected. Results One assessment was successfully completed in 27 patients. 5 patients completed the assessments at both time points. In addition, 7 more patients were enrolled, with a second assessment expected to be completed at the time of conference presentation. Scores on the MoCA assessment prior to the initiation of standard of care procedures ranged from 5/30 to 28/30, with the average score being an 8/30. Of those who have completed a follow up assessment, the average score on the MoCA increased by 7.5 points, respectively. Interestingly, the same trend was not observed for scores on the COWA at both time points. The average length of time between each assessment was 3.5 months (+/‐ 3 weeks). GCS scores increased in those with clinical improvement. No interruptions to standard of care workflows were noted. Correlations between changes in assessment scores and appearance of the hematoma at 3‐6 months are being finalized and prepared for the SVIN conference. Conclusions Preliminary analyses have demonstrated that diminished size and resolution of the hematoma is associated with higher scores on the MoCA and the COWA in some patients, mirroring findings in the literature. However, in some patients, MoCA scores decreased despite decreased hematoma volume, which demonstrates the complexity of measuring cognitive function in this population. No standard of care workflow interruptions were noted.
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 | 0,002 |
| 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 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».