Predictive Value of Thrombus Attenuation on Thin-Slice Non-Contrast CT for Persistent Occlusion after Intravenous Thrombolysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In stroke erythrocyte-rich thrombi are more sensitive to intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV-rtPA) and have higher density on non-contrast CT (NCCT). We investigated the relationship between thrombus density and recanalization and whether persistent occlusions can be predicted by Hounsfield unit (HU) measurements. METHODS: In 88 IV-rtPA-treated patients with intracranial ICA or MCA occluding thrombus and follow-up imaging, thrombus and contralateral vessel attenuation measurements were performed on thin-slice NCCT. Mean absolute and relative HU were compared between patients with persistent occlusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction system, grade 0/1/2a) and recanalization (grade 2b/3). Univariate and multivariate (adjusted for stroke subtype, clot burden score, occlusion site and time to thrombolysis) odds ratios for persistent occlusion were calculated. Additional prognostic value for persistent occlusion was estimated by adding HU measurements to the area under the curve (AUC) of known determinants and calculating optimal cut-off values. RESULTS: Patients with persistent occlusion (n = 19) had significant lower mean HU (absolute 52.2 ± 9.5, relative 1.29 ± 0.20) compared to recanalization (absolute 63.1 ± 10.7, relative 1.54 ± 0.23, both p < 0.0001). Odds ratios for persistent occlusion were 3.1 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.6-6.0) univariate and 3.1 (95% CI 1.7-5.7) multivariate per 10 absolute HU decrease and 3.2 (95% CI 1.6-6.5) univariate and 4.1 (95% CI 1.8-9.1) multivariate per 0.20 relative HU decrease. Attenuation measurements significantly increased the AUC (0.67) of the known determinants to 0.84 (absolute HU) and 0.86 (relative HU). Cut-off values of <56.5 absolute HU and <1.38 relative HU showed optimal predictive values for persistent occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Thrombus density is related to recanalization rate. Lower absolute and relative HU are independently related to persistent occlusion and HU measurements significantly increase discriminative performances of known recanalization determinants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".