MRI vs CT for Baseline Imaging Evaluation in Acute Large Artery Ischemic Stroke.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Whether MRI or CT is preferable for the evaluation of patients with suspected stroke remains a matter of debate, given that the imaging modality acquired at baseline may be a relevant determinant of workflow delays and outcomes with it, in patients with stroke undergoing acute reperfusion therapies. METHODS In this post hoc analysis of the SWIFT-DIRECT trial that investigated noninferiority of thrombectomy alone vs IV thrombolysis (IVT) + thrombectomy in patients with an acute ischemic anterior circulation large vessel occlusive stroke eligible to receive IVT within 4.5 hours after last seen well, we tested for a potential interaction between baseline imaging modality (MRI/MR-angiography [MRA] vs CT/CT-angiography [CTA]) and the effect of acute treatment (thrombectomy vs IVT + thrombectomy) on clinical and safety outcomes and procedural metrics (primary analysis). Moreover, we examined the association between baseline imaging modality and these outcomes using regression models adjusted for age, sex, baseline NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), occlusion location, and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) (secondary analysis). Endpoints included workflow times, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score at 90 days, the rate of successful reperfusion, the odds for early neurologic deterioration within 24 hours, and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. The imaging modality acquired was chosen at the discretion of the treating physicians and commonly reflects center-specific standard procedures. RESULTS Four hundred five of 408 patients enrolled in the SWIFT-DIRECT trial were included in this substudy. Two hundred (49.4%) patients underwent MRI/MRA, and 205 (50.6%) underwent CT/CTA. Patients with MRI/MRA had lower NIHSS scores (16 [interquartile range (IQR) 12-20] vs 18 [IQR 14-20], p = 0.012) and lower ASPECTS (8 [IQR 6-9] vs 8 [IQR 7-9], p = 0.021) compared with those with CT/CTA. In terms of the primary analysis, we found no evidence for an interaction between baseline imaging modality and the effect of IVT + thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone. Regarding the secondary analysis, MRI/MRA acquisition was associated with workflow delays of approximately 20 minutes, higher odds of functional independence at 90 days (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.07-2.56), and similar mortality rates (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.36-1.47) compared with CT/CTA. DISCUSSION This post hoc analysis does not suggest treatment effect heterogeneity of IVT + thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone in large artery stroke patients with different imaging modalities. There was no evidence that functional outcome at 90 days was less favorable following MRI/MRA at baseline compared with CT/CTA, despite significant workflow delays. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192332.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».