P.096 A single institution experience with 217 average risk patients undergoing carotid angioplasty and stenting in the post CREST era, a real life experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The CREST trial remains the most influential study regarding choice of treatment modality for carotid revascularization in the modern era. The effect of the CREST trial on patient outcomes and changes to clinical practice are yet to be fully elucidated. Methods: We report a cohort of 217 consecutive symptomatic average risk patients undergoing CAS at St. Michael’s Hospital, between 2010 and 2016. Outcome measures were stroke, MI and death at 30 days post procedure. Of the 217 patients, 42 were above the age of 75 (19%). Results: The 30-day combined stroke, MI and death outcome for all patients was 4.1%. One death occurred (0.46%) in a patient who suffered an MI. One disabling stroke (0.46%) and 3 mild strokes (1.38%) with full recovery by 6 months occurred. Overall 4 patients suffered an MI (1.84%). Conclusions: As a result of the CREST trial in our single institutional experience there has been a clear migration to treating average risk patients using CAS, a treatment previously reserved for high risk patients. In this average risk cohort we report favourable outcomes when compared to the CREST trial as well as the firmly established benchmarks for CEA complications derived from the NASCET trial.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".