MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2766715445 · doi:10.1161/str.48.suppl_1.31

Abstract 31: The Association Between Baseline Ischemic Core Volume and Benefit of Endovascular Thrombectomy in Pooled Data from Six Randomized Trials

2017· article· en· W2766715445 on OpenAlexaff
Bruce Campbell, Charles B.L.M. Majoie, Bijoy K. Menon, Mayank Goyal, Diederik W.J. Dippel, Andrew M. Demchuk, Antoni Dávalos, David S. Liebeskind, Scott Brown, Gagan Sharma, Aad van der Lugt, Luís San Román, Keith W. Muir, Phil White, Jeffrey L. Saver, Tudor G. Jovin, Michael D. Hill, Peter Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleRandomized controlled trialStroke (engine)ThrombolysisEndovascular treatmentPerfusion scanningClinical trialSolitaire Cryptographic AlgorithmInternal medicineSurgeryNuclear medicinePerfusionIschemic strokeIschemiaAneurysm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and purpose: Patients estimated to have a large irreversibly injured ischemic core are sometimes excluded from reperfusion therapies. We examined the association between estimated core volume and thrombectomy outcomes. Methods: Patient-level CT perfusion (CTP) and clinical data were pooled from trials comparing endovascular thrombectomy with standard care in anterior circulation ischemic stroke: MR CLEAN, EXTEND IA, ESCAPE, SWIFT PRIME, REVASCAT and PISTE. Ischemic core volume was estimated using relative cerebral blood flow <30% of normal brain (RAPID automated software, IschemaView). The primary outcome was the 90 day modified Rankin scale (mRS), adjusted for baseline prognostic variables. To account for between-trial variance we used mixed-effects modeling with a random effect for trial incorporated in all models. Results: Of 1352 patients, pre-treatment CTP was assessable in 539 after exclusion of 27 patients (12 severe motion, 2 no lesion within coverage, 2 contrast bolus failure, 11 data corruption during transfer from site). There were 264 allocated to endovascular thrombectomy and 275 to control. Baseline characteristics were similar between endovascular and control patients with CTP, median core 9.6 mL (IQR 2.4-26 mL) and with the overall trial demographics. Larger estimated core volume was associated with lower probability of independent outcome (mRS 0-2) in endovascular (OR 0.87 95%CI 0.80-0.95) and control patients (OR 0.85 95%CI 0.77-0.93, core*treatment interaction p=0.62) and increased disability: utility scores derived from mRS reduced by 2% (95%CI 1-4%) per 10mL increase in core volume for both endovascular and control patients (core*treatment interaction p=0.79). However, patients with >70mL core (median 100 mL, IQR 82-144mL) still benefitted from thrombectomy: ordinal mRS cOR 7.0 (2.6 -18.9) and the number needed to treat (NNT) remained stable across the spectrum of core volumes (point estimate NNT<10 for mRS 0-2 and NNT<3 for improvement in at least 1 mRS level). Conclusions: Increasing estimated core volume was independently associated with worse outcome but endovascular thrombectomy remained effective versus standard care even in patients with large core who otherwise met eligibility for these trials.

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)0.124
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1240.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.037
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→