MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2284082290 · doi:10.1161/str.44.suppl_1.awp49

Abstract WP49: Defining the Acute Infarct Core with CT Perfusion in Ischemic Stroke: Physiological and Technical Issues

2013· article· en· W2284082290 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher D. d’Esterre, Enrico Fainardi, Ting Yim Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePenumbraCerebral blood flowPerfusion scanningPerfusionHemodynamicsInfarctionStroke (engine)Cerebral blood volumeBlood volumeNuclear medicineBlood flowCardiologyRadiologyInternal medicineIschemiaMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: CT Perfusion (CTP) defined hemodynamic parameters used to delineate admission infarct core can be affected by truncated data acquisition, recanalization status and reactive hyperemia. We determined the optimal CTP parameter for infarct demarcation while taking these variables into account. Methods: 30 patients had CTP/NCCT scanning within 6 hours of ictus, a 24 hour CTA and an NCCT at 3 months post stroke to define final infarct. Patients were analyzed according to: 1) the percent wash out (truncation) of the ischemic time density curve (ITDC) and 2) recanalization status defined using the 24 hour CTA. CTP functional maps were generated using delay insensitive CTP software (GE Healthcare). For all patients, the total ischemic lesion (infarct+penumbra+benign oligemia) was defined using the contrast delay plus mean transit time map. Cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV) and the product of CBF and CBV (CBFxCBV) were used to define the infarct core defect, according to established thresholds, and compared with the infarct volume defined on the 3 month NCCT. The coefficients of correlation (R2) of linear regression models were used for the comparisons. Results: R2 values for admission CBF, CBV, and CBFxCBV defect versus final infarct volume for patients with and without truncation of the ITDC were 0.89, 0.49, 0.65 and 0.90, 0.42, 0.68, respectively; while R2 values for patients with and without recanalization at 24 hours were 0.73, 0.33, 0.44 and 0.84, 0.54, 0.45, respectively. In addition, for the recanalization group with and without truncation of the ITDC, R2 for CBF, CBV, CBFxCBV versus final infarct volume were 0.73, 0.12, 0.31 and 0.79, 0.58, 0.56, respectively. Hyperemia, defined as an increase in CBV relative to the contralateral hemisphere, was observed in 30% of patients. Both hyperemia and ITDC truncation led to poor correlation between the CBV defect and NCCT defined infarct volume. Conclusion: CBF is the optimal parameter for determining the size of the acute infarct core as it is not affected by truncation of the ITDC and autoregulatory vasodilation causing reactive hyperemia.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→