MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2898077637 · doi:10.1161/str.49.suppl_1.wp55

Abstract WP55: Low Predictive Value of Multiphase CT Angiography for CT Perfusion Defined Ischemic Penumbra

2018· article· en· W2898077637 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Wannamaker, Harsha Kamble Jayaprakash, Jeremy Rempel, Brian Buck, Jayme C. Kosior, Kenneth Butcher

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenumbraMedicineAngiographyPerfusionNuclear medicineStroke (engine)RadiologyPerfusion scanningCollateral circulationIschemiaCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Multiphase CT angiography (mCTA) has been proposed as an alternative to CT Perfusion (CTP) for identification of acute stroke patients with the potential for salvage after reperfusion therapy. We tested the hypothesis that poor collateral patterns on mCTA are predictive of large CTP defined ischemic cores. Methods: Multiphase CTA was generated from CTP source images (peak arterial, +8 and +16 s). Two expert raters assessed the collateral pattern on mCTA (absent/moderate/good). An Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) score was also assessed on the first and last phase of the mCTA as well as the non-contrast CT (NCCT). Hypoperfused regions were defined as those without vessel enhancement on the first phase. Core regions were defined as those without vessel enhancement on the final phase and/or NCCT changes. An ASPECTS mismatch score was calculated as a penumbral estimate. Penumbral tissue on CTP was defined as regions with a Delay Time (DT) >3 seconds, and ischemic core was defined as a combination of DT>3 seconds and relative CBF<40% of the contralateral hemisphere. Results: Of 141 patients, 79(56%) had penumbral patterns on CTP. Of these, 71(90%) had moderate/good collaterals. The mean penumbral volume in all patients was 20.8±26.6 ml and that in patients with large vessel occlusions (LVO; n=40) was 44.0±30.5 ml. At an ASPECTS mismatch score threshold of 2, mCTA predicted CTP defined penumbral patterns with a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of only 10%. The positive and negative predictive values were 57.7% and 61.5% respectively. In large vessel occlusion patients, mCTA predicted penumbra with 95.8% sensitivity and 43.8% specificity. The positive predictive value for penumbral patterns was 71.7%, and the negative predictive value was 87.5%. Eight patients were found to have a large core (>70 ml) on CTP, 3 of whom had moderate/good collaterals and 2 of whom also had a NCCT ASPECTS>5. Four large core patients had a mCTA penumbral score ≥ 2. Discussion: mCTA predicts penumbra with relatively high sensitivity, particularly in LVO patients. In some patients, however, mCTA can incorrectly classify penumbral patterns despite the presence of large cores on CTP. In non-LVO patients, mCTA is neither sensitive, nor specific for penumbral patterns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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