MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reversal of Focal Misery Perfusion after Intracranial Angioplasty: Case Report

2001· article· en· W2009189401 on OpenAlexaff
Colin P. Derdeyn, DeWitte T. Cross, Christopher J. Moran, Ralph G. Dacey

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurosurgery · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sept Iles
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineAngioplastyStenosisCardiologyInternal carotid arteryInternal medicineCerebral blood flowRadiologyStroke (engine)AngiographyCerebral angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE AND IMPORTANCE: The presence of reduced blood flow and increased oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) (misery perfusion) in the hemisphere distal to an occluded carotid artery is a proven risk factor for subsequent stroke. Whether angioplasty of intracranial stenosis is sufficient to reverse this condition has not been documented. CLINICAL PRESENTATION: A 67-year-old man exhibited progressive right hemispheric ischemic symptoms despite maximal antiplatelet and antithrombotic therapy. Angiography demonstrated focal 80% stenosis of the supraclinoid segment of the ipsilateral internal carotid artery. TECHNIQUE: 15O positron emission tomographic measurements of cerebral blood flow and OEF were made before and after transfemoral percutaneous angioplasty. OEF values measured before angioplasty were elevated in the middle cerebral artery distal to the stenosis. Angioplasty reduced the degree of luminal stenosis to 40% (linear diameter). OEF values measured 36 hours after angioplasty were normal. CONCLUSION: Angioplasty of intracranial stenosis can restore normal cerebral blood flow and oxygen extraction, despite mild residual stenosis after the procedure. Hemodynamic measurements may be useful for the identification of patients with the greatest potential to benefit from angioplasty.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurosurgerySame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207