Abstract WP362: Subarachnoid and Subdural Hemorrhages Concomitant to Acute Lobar Intracerebral Hematoma are Markers of Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Convexity subarachnoid hemorrhage (cSAH) or subdural Hematoma (SDH) are occasionally described on CT or MRI in the area of acute lobar intracerebral hematoma (ICH). The prevalence and the etiologic significance of this association are not well known. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that cSAH and SDH were more frequent in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy (CCA)-related lobar ICH. Methods: Using our electronic database, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical and MRI characteristics of 165 consecutive patients (mean age 70 ± 13 years) admitted for acute lobar ICH. The presence of cSAH and SDH was assessed by 2 reviewers on a brain MRI performed within 10 days after ICH onset. Results: SDH and cSAH were present in respectively 28.5 and 54.5 % of all patients. Among patients with acute lobar ICH meeting the modified Boston criteria for probable CAA, the frequency was 37.5 % (27/72) for SDH and 73 % (53/72) for cSAH, which is significantly higher than among patients with hematoma of other causes ( 21.5 and 39.8 %; p=0.03 and p<0.001 respectively). The association remained significant considering patients meeting the modified Boston criteria for probable or possible CAA versus others causes. Conclusions: Using MRI for evaluation of acute lobar ICH, cSAH and SDH were very frequent and associated with CCA. This is consistent with the involvement of leptomeningeal arteries in this disease. The presence of subarachnoid or subdural hemorrhage should be systematically assessed and could be added to diagnostic criteria for CAA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".