MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562024612 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.116.015164

Arterial Obstruction on Computed Tomographic or Magnetic Resonance Angiography and Response to Intravenous Thrombolytics in Ischemic Stroke

2016· review· en· W2562024612 on OpenAlexaff
Grant Mair, Rüdiger von Kummer, Alessandro Adami, Phil White, Matthew Adams, Bernard Yan, Andrew M. Demchuk, Andrew Farrall, R. J. Sellar, Eleni Sakka, Jeb Palmer, David Perry, Richard I. Lindley, Peter Sandercock, Joanna M. Wardlaw

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioAngiographyMagnetic resonance angiographyConfidence intervalStroke (engine)RadiologyFibrinolytic agentMagnetic resonance imagingRandomized controlled trialComputed tomographic angiographyCerebral angiographyInternal medicineTissue plasminogen activator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography are used increasingly to assess arterial patency in patients with ischemic stroke. We determined which baseline angiography features predict response to intravenous thrombolytics in ischemic stroke using randomized controlled trial data. METHODS: We analyzed angiograms from the IST-3 (Third International Stroke Trial), an international, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial of intravenous alteplase. Readers, masked to clinical, treatment, and outcome data, assessed prerandomization computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography for presence, extent, location, and completeness of obstruction and collaterals. We compared angiography findings to 6-month functional outcome (Oxford Handicap Scale) and tested for interactions with alteplase, using ordinal regression in adjusted analyses. We also meta-analyzed all available angiography data from other randomized controlled trials of intravenous thrombolytics. RESULTS: In IST-3, 300 patients had prerandomization angiography (computed tomographic angiography=271 and magnetic resonance angiography=29). On multivariable analysis, more extensive angiographic obstruction and poor collaterals independently predicted poor outcome (P<0.01). We identified no significant interaction between angiography findings and alteplase effect on Oxford Handicap Scale (P≥0.075) in IST-3. In meta-analysis (5 trials of alteplase or desmoteplase, including IST-3, n=591), there was a significantly increased benefit of thrombolytics on outcome (odds ratio>1 indicates benefit) in patients with (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-3.64; P=0.011) versus without (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.35; P=0.566) arterial obstruction (P for interaction 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous thrombolytics provide benefit to stroke patients with computed tomographic angiography or magnetic resonance angiography evidence of arterial obstruction, but the sample was underpowered to demonstrate significant treatment benefit or harm among patients with apparently patent arteries. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN25765518.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.008
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.285
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations31
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207