Regional Comparison of Multiphase Computed Tomographic Angiography and Computed Tomographic Perfusion for Prediction of Tissue Fate in Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose— Within different brain regions, we determine the comparative value of multiphase computed tomographic angiography (mCTA) and computed tomographic perfusion (CTP) in predicting follow-up infarction. Methods— Patients with M1-middle cerebral artery occlusions were prospectively included in this multicenter study. Regional analysis was performed for each patient within Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score regions M2 to M6. Regional pial vessel filling was assessed on mCTA in 3 ways: (1) Washout of contrast within pial vessels; (2) Extent of maximal pial vessel enhancement compared with contralateral hemisphere; (3) Delay in maximal pial vessel enhancement compared with contralateral hemisphere. Cerebral blood flow, cerebral blood volume, and Tmax data were extracted within these Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score regions. Twenty-four- to 36-hour magnetic resonance imaging/CT was assessed for infarct in each Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score region (defined as >20% infarction within that region). Mixed effects logistic regression models were used to compare mCTA and CTP parameters when predicting brain infarction. Area under the receiver operating characteristics was used to assess discriminative value of statistical models. Results— Seventy-seven patients were included. mCTA parameter washout and CTP parameter Tmax were significantly associated with follow-up infarction in all models ( P <0.05). The area under the receiver operating characteristic for mCTA models ranged from 92% to 94% and was not different compared with all CTP models ( P >0.05). Mean Tmax and cerebral blood volume values were significantly different between each washout score ( P <0.01) and each delay score category ( P <0.01). Mean Tmax, cerebral blood flow, and cerebral blood volume values were significantly different between each extent score category ( P <0.05). Conclusions— Similar to CTP, multiphase CTA can be used to predict tissue fate regionally in acute ischemic stroke patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".