MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2259959521 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a4532

Cerebral Perfusion Pressure is Maintained in Acute Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A CT Perfusion Study

2015· article· en· W2259959521 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Tamm, Richard McCourt, Bronwen Gould, Mahesh Kate, Jayme C. Kosior, T Jeerakathil, Laura C. Gioia, Dar Dowlatshahi, Michael D. Hill, Shelagh B. Coutts, Andrew M. Demchuk, Brian Buck, D.J. Emery, Ashfaq Shuaib, Kenneth Butcher

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
FundersAlberta InnovatesHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicinePerfusionIntracerebral hemorrhageCerebral perfusion pressurePerfusion scanningCardiologyAnesthesiaSubarachnoid hemorrhage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although blood pressure reduction has been postulated to result in a fall in cerebral perfusion pressure in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage, the latter is rarely measured. We assessed regional cerebral perfusion pressure in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage by using CT perfusion source data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with acute primary intracerebral hemorrhage were randomized to target systolic blood pressures of <150 mm Hg (n = 37) or <180 mm Hg (n = 36). Regional maps of cerebral blood flow, cerebral perfusion pressure, and cerebrovascular resistance were generated by using CT perfusion source data, obtained 2 hours after randomization. RESULTS: Perihematoma cerebral blood flow (38.7 ± 11.9 mL/100 g/min) was reduced relative to contralateral regions (44.1 ± 11.1 mL/100 g/min, P = .001), but cerebral perfusion pressure was not (14.4 ± 4.6 minutes(-1) versus 14.3 ± 4.8 minutes(-1), P = .93). Perihematoma cerebrovascular resistance (0.34 ± 0.11 g/mL) was higher than that in the contralateral region (0.30 ± 0.10 g/mL, P < .001). Ipsilateral and contralateral cerebral perfusion pressure in the external (15.0 ± 4.6 versus 15.6 ± 5.3 minutes(-1), P = .15) and internal (15.0 ± 4.8 versus 15.0 ± 4.8 minutes(-1), P = .90) borderzone regions were all similar. Borderzone cerebral perfusion pressure was similar to mean global cerebral perfusion pressure (14.7 ± 4.7 minutes(-1), P ≥ .29). Perihematoma cerebral perfusion pressure did not differ between blood pressure treatment groups (13.9 ± 5.5 minutes(-1) versus 14.8 ± 3.4 minutes(-1), P = .38) or vary with mean arterial pressure (r = -0.08, [-0.10, 0.05]). CONCLUSIONS: Perihematoma cerebral perfusion pressure is maintained despite increased cerebrovascular resistance and reduced cerebral blood flow. Aggressive antihypertensive therapy does not affect perihematoma or borderzone cerebral perfusion pressure. Maintenance of cerebral perfusion pressure provides physiologic support for the safety of blood pressure reduction in intracerebral hemorrhage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207