Favorable revascularization therapy in patients with ASPECTS ≤ 5 on DWI in anterior circulation stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A low baseline Alberta Stroke Programme Early CT Score (ASPECTS) is strongly associated with low rates of favorable outcome in patients with acute stroke. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of revascularization therapy in patient with ASPECTS ≤5 in anterior circulation infarct. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 108 consecutive patients presenting low ASPECTS on diffusion-weighted imaging. Sixty patients were treated by mechanical thrombectomy, including 34 patients who received simultaneously intravenous thrombolysis. A control group of 48 patients not eligible for reperfusion therapy gave us a perspective on the natural history. Clinical outcome was evaluated at 90 days using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score. Hemicraniectomy after malignant infarction, mortality, and symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage (sICH) were also reported. RESULTS: Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 2b-3 was assessed in 75% of treated patients. Reperfusion therapy led to significantly reduced disability (mRS score 0-2) at 90 days compared with the control group (30% vs 2.1%, p<0.001), hemicraniectomy (3.3% vs 22.9%, p=0.002), and death at 90 days (25% vs 47.9%, p=0.01). The sICH level was similar in treated patients and in the control group (p=0.78). Patients aged ≤70 years in the thrombectomy group had a significantly better clinical outcome than older patients (37.5% vs 10%, p=0.02), regardless of baseline characteristics or recanalization rate. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute stroke in the anterior circulation and ASPECTS ≤5 revascularization therapy contributes to a favorable clinical outcome at 90 days, especially in patients younger than 70 years.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".