MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801855834 · doi:10.1002/ccd.27611

Long‐term follow up of 3 T MRI‐detected brain lesions after percutaneous catheter‐based left atrial appendage closure

2018· article· en· W2801855834 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barbara Bellmann, Andreas Rillig, Carsten Skurk, David M. Leistner, Karl Georg Hæusler, Tina Lin, Rohat Geran, Luzie Koehler, Selma Guttmann, Verena Tscholl, Mattias Roser, Klaus Lenz, Kersten Villringer, Jai Wun Park, Jochen B. Fiebach, Ulf Landmesser

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryMagnetic resonance imagingPercutaneousCardiologyStroke (engine)Internal medicineNeurocognitiveRadiologyNuclear medicineCognitive impairmentCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) for stroke prevention is an increasingly performed intervention. AIMS: This prospective study aims to evaluate the incidence of long-term magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-detected brain lesions as well as potential changes of neurocognitive function after percutaneous LAAC. METHODS: Brain MRI at 3 T was performed within 24 hr before and after LAAC. A follow-up MRI was carried out after three months. Neuro-cognitive examination using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Test was performed. RESULTS: Successful device implantation was achieved in all 25 patients (age 74.6 ± 10.2 years, male = 17) using the Amulet (n = 20), Occlutech (n = 3), or a Lambre (n = 2) device. In 12/25 (48%) patients, acute brain lesions (ABL) were detected after LAAC. A three-month follow-up MRI was performed in seven patients, and no new ABLs were seen. In 5/7 (71%) patients, there were no residual changes from the ABLs detectable. However, the FLAIR sequence was still positive in two patients. After LAAC, there were no significant differences in the MoCA-test (mean 24.3 ± 4.5 vs. 23.5 ± 4.5; P = 0.1) and the NIHSS-score (mean 0.9 ± 1.6 vs. 1.2 ± 1.8; P = 0.1). This was the same at the three-month follow-up (MoCA-test 23.5 ± 4.5 vs. 23.8 ± 2.7; P = 0.3; NIHSS-score 1.2 ± 1.8 vs. 1.0 ± 0.8; P = 0.4). CONCLUSION: While new MRI-detected brain lesions are commonly observed after percutaneous LAAC, ABLs were no longer detectable in 71% of the patients at the three-month follow-up. There were no significant changes in neurocognitive function after LAAC and at the three-month follow-up.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207