Basilar Artery Stenosis Mimicking the Lacunar Syndrome of Pure Motor Hemiparesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stereotyped, repeated transient ischemic attacks manifesting as pure motor hemiparesis are most often attributed to ischemia of the internal capsule or ventral pons resulting from in situ disease of the small penetrating arteries. CASE DESCRIPTION: We report a 61-year-old man presenting with recurrent episodes of left-sided weakness consistent with the lacunar syndrome of pure motor hemiparesis. Subsequent neuroimaging revealed infarction of the right ventral pons and a critical basilar artery stenosis as the inciting lesion. Despite maximal antithrombotic therapy, he continued to have repeated symptoms. Angioplasty and stenting were attempted but both failed due to plaque recoil and technical difficulties. After the procedure, the patient had no further ischemic episodes and remained symptom-free at two months. CONCLUSIONS: This case illustrates the imprecise and discordant relationship between the mode of presentation of a stroke syndrome and its presumed pathophysiology. The lacunar syndrome of pure motor hemiparesis should be recognized by clinicians as a mode of stroke presentation due not only to small vessel disease, but also to large artery atherosclerotic disease such as basilar artery stenosis. Prompt institution of treatment can lead to a good clinical outcome.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".