The Role of Sonolysis and Sonothrombolysis in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Case‐Control Studies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the evidence on the safety and efficacy of sonothrombolysis in acute stroke. SEARCH METHODS: Electronic databases and grey literature were searched under different MeSH terms from 1970 to present. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized control trials (RCTs) and case control studies (CCSs) on sonolysis and sonothrombolysis alone or with microsphere in acute stroke patients (>18 old). Outcome measures included complete recanalization (CR) at 1-2 and 24 hours, 3 months modified Rankin Scale (mRS), and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Data was extracted to Review Manager software. RESULTS: Fifty-seven studies were retrieved and analyzed. Ten studies (7 RCTs and 3 CCSs) were included in our meta-analysis, which revealed that sonolysis and sonothrombolysis are safe (OR of sICH: 1.14; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56- 2.34;P=0.71) and effective (OR of CR at 1-2 hours: 2.95;95% CI: 1.81-4.81;P<0.00001) and have more than two-fold higher likelihood of favourable long-term outcome (3-month mRS 0-2; OR: 2.20; CI:1.52-3.19;P<0.0001). Further subgroup analysis based on the presence of microsphere revealed that it is safe (OR of sICH: 1.18; CI:0.433.24;P=0.75) and effective (OR of CR: 2.61; CI: 1.36-4.99;P=0.004). Subgroup analysis based on sonolysis revealed to be safe and effective. CONCLUSIONS: This novel treatment appears safe and effective. The evidence of microsphere as an enhancement of sonothrombolysis is evolving.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.033 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it