Vascular Anatomy Predicts the Risk of Cerebral Ischemia in Patients Randomized to Carotid Stenting Versus Endarterectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose— Complex vascular anatomy might increase the risk of procedural stroke during carotid artery stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trial evidence that vascular anatomy should inform the choice between CAS and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been lacking. Methods— One-hundred eighty-four patients with symptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis who were randomly assigned to CAS or CEA in the ICSS (International Carotid Stenting Study) underwent magnetic resonance (n=126) or computed tomographic angiography (n=58) at baseline and brain magnetic resonance imaging before and after treatment. We investigated the association between aortic arch configuration, angles of supra-aortic arteries, degree, length of stenosis, and plaque ulceration with the presence of ≥1 new ischemic brain lesion on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI+) after treatment. Results— Forty-nine of 97 patients in the CAS group (51%) and 14 of 87 in the CEA group (16%) were DWI+ (odds ratio [OR], 6.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9–12.4; P <0.001). In the CAS group, aortic arch configuration type 2/3 (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1–7.1; P =0.027) and the degree of the largest internal carotid artery angle (≥60° versus <60°; OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.7–10.1; P =0.002) were both associated with DWI+, also after correction for age. No predictors for DWI+ were identified in the CEA group. The DWI+ risk in CAS increased further over CEA if the largest internal carotid artery angle was ≥60° (OR, 11.8; 95% CI, 4.1–34.1) than if it was <60° (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.2–9.8; interaction P =0.035). Conclusions— Complex configuration of the aortic arch and internal carotid artery tortuosity increase the risk of cerebral ischemia during CAS, but not during CEA. Vascular anatomy should be taken into account when selecting patients for stenting. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN25337470 . Unique identifier: ISRCTN25337470.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".