MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2282916921 · doi:10.1161/str.44.suppl_1.a65

Abstract 65: Malignant Emboli On Trans Cranial Doppler During Carotid Stenting Predict Post Procedural DWI Lesions And Are Most Common During Stent And Distal Protection Device Deployment

2013· article· en· W2282916921 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Almekhlafi, Simerpeet Bal, Caroline J. Stephenson, Eileen Stewart, Sachin Mishra, Vivek Nambiar, Bijoy K. Menon, Michael D. Hill, Andrew M. Demchuk, Mayank Goyal

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsymptomaticCarotid stentingRadiologyNuclear medicineProspective cohort studyTranscranial DopplerSurgeryStenosisCarotid endarterectomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGOUND: We evaluated the safety of the steps during carotid stenting. METHODS: This was a prospective single-arm study. Cases were monitored by TCD during the stenting procedure. The time of each of 11 steps was recorded and noted during TCD interpretation. Post stenting MRI was done in all patients. Emboli on TCD were classified based on the relative energy index of microemboli (REIM) method into microemboli (REIM ≤ 1) or malignant (REIM >1). Medians were compared using Mann-Whitney test. A negative binomial model was used to investigate the predictive value of TCD findings on new DWI hits. RESULTS: We enrolled 30 subjects. The median age was 70.5 years and 23.3% were asymptomatic. The median count of embolic signals was 212.5 (108 microemboli, 80 malignant). Stent deployment had the highest median count 58 (31 microemboli, 20 malignant) followed by protection device deployment 30 (21 microemboli, 10 malignant, (p value 0.0006)) “Figure”. On post stenting MRI, 80% had new DWI hits. The median DWI count was 4 (range 0-33). The median volume of DWI hits was 0.4 ml (range 0 - 6.1 ml). 63% of patients had a total volume under 1 ml. Only 2 patients (6.7%) had new deficits post stenting. The median DWI volume in those patients was 3.0 ml compared to 0.6 ml in asymptomatic cases (p 0.037). Median emboli count in those with vs. without new deficits was not different (p 0.87) Total TCD emboli count did not predict DWI hits, adjusting for age and symptoms’ status (p 0.25). Malignant emboli predicted new DWI hits (p 0.044). For every malignant embolus, the expected count of DWI hits increases by 1% (CI95 0-2%). There was no relation between total or malignant emboli with the DWI volume. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study, we observed a high incidence of emboli on TCD during stenting, especially when stent and protection device were deployed. Most patients developed new DWI hits but only 6.7% had new deficits. The combined DWI volume was less than 1.0 ml in most cases. Only malignant emboli predicted new DWI hits.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases→French-language works237,207→