Diagnosis and management of carotid free-floating thrombus: A systematic literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus regarding the management of carotid free-floating thrombi in patients with acute ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack. AIMS: This systematic review aims to (1) describe the current imaging methods for diagnosis of carotid free-floating thrombi and its associated risk factors, (2) estimate the proportion of carotid free-floating thrombi diagnosed in stroke patients, (3) estimate the proportion of carotid free-floating thrombi patients treated medically and surgically, and (4) evaluate 30-day outcomes. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and manually for references reporting carotid free-floating thrombi from 1960 until June 2017. We estimated the frequency of carotid free-floating thrombi and evaluated 30-day outcomes using Cox regression. We defined the timing of surgical intervention as early (less than 72 h) and delayed (more or equal to 72 h). SUMMARY OF REVIEW: We retrieved 525 carotid free-floating thrombi cases from 58 case series and 83 case reports. Carotid free-floating thrombi were present in 1.53% of stroke patients. Carotid free-floating thrombi diagnosis was made by digital subtraction angiography (38.1%), carotid duplex ultrasound (29.5%), and computed tomography angiography (29.5%). The 30-day risk of transient ischemic attack, silent brain ischemia, any stroke or death was 17.1%. In multivariate analyses, there were no differences in outcome for any anticoagulation regime or timing of revascularization procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of carotid free-floating thrombi is more common due to the increased use of early noninvasive vascular imaging in transient ischemic attack and stroke. It poses a high short-term risk of stroke and death, but there is as yet no established treatment. The low quality of evidence in the carotid free-floating thrombi literature limits the interpretation of our results and warrants a large-scale prospective cohort study in carotid free-floating thrombi.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".