Effects of Age on Outcome in the SENTIS Trial: Better Outcomes in Elderly Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increasing age is associated with poor outcome after stroke. The Safety and Efficacy of NeuroFlo Technology in Ischemic Stroke (SENTIS) trial explored the augmentation of collateral circulation to the ischemic penumbra as a novel approach to stroke treatment. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to examine the effect of age on outcomes in the SENTIS trial. METHODS: Using data from the randomized controlled SENTIS trial, we explored outcomes of cerebral blood flow augmentation using the NeuroFlo™ device in patients categorized by age strata at 70 and 80 years. We evaluated outcomes of overall serious adverse event (SAE) and intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) rates, freedom from all-cause and stroke-related mortality, and independent functional outcome as defined by the modified Rankin Scale score (mRS ≤2). RESULTS: The SENTIS as-treated cohort included 251 patients ≥70 years and 107 patients ≥80 years. Elderly SENTIS patients included a higher percentage of women and Caucasians than the younger group. Patients in the older group more frequently had vascular risk factors including hypertension, previous stroke, transient ischemic attacks and atrial fibrillation. However, baseline risk-factor profile, stroke severity, and time to randomization did not differ between the treated and nontreated elderly patients. The older patients treated with NeuroFlo had significantly higher chances for survival and for obtaining an independent functional state (mRS ≤2) compared with those who were not treated. Rates of SAEs and ICHs did not differ between the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: NeuroFlo treatment is safe and results in better outcomes for elderly patients. This may be the result of recruitment and support of already existing collateral systems in these patients.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".