MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2948796267 · doi:10.1161/str.48.suppl_1.tp13

Abstract TP13: Procedural Time (Groin Puncture to Recanalization) Significantly Predicts Outcomes in Endovascular Treatment: A Pooled Analysis of SWIFT, STAR and SWIFT PRIME Trials

2017· article· en· W2948796267 on OpenAlexaff
Ameer E Hassan, Jeffrey L. Saver, Mayank Goyal, David S. Liebeskind, Reza Jahan, Adnan I. Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSolitaire Cryptographic AlgorithmStroke (engine)SurgeryOdds ratioGroinMultivariate analysisRandomized controlled trialClinical trialModified Rankin ScaleInternal medicineIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Recent single center studies have suggested that “procedural time” independent of “time to procedure” can affect outcomes of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing endovascular treatment (ET). We performed a pooled analysis from three ET trials to determine the effect of procedural time on angiographic and clinical outcomes. Objective: To determine the relationship between procedural time and clinical outcomes among acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing successful recanalization with ET. Methods: We analyzed data from SWIFT, STAR and SWIFT PRIME trials. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, NIHSS score on admission, intracranial hemorrhage rates and mRS at 3 months post procedure were analyzed. TICI scale was used to grade post procedure angiographic recanalization. Procedural time was defined by the time interval between groin puncture and recanalization. We estimated the procedural time after which favorable clinical outcome was unlikely even after recanalization (futile) after age and NIHSS score adjustment. Results: We analyzed 301 patients who underwent ET and had near complete or complete recanalization (TICI 2b or 3). The procedural time (±SD) was significantly shorter in patients who achieved a favorable outcome (mRS 0-2) compared with those who did not achieve favorable outcome (44±25 vs 51±33 minutes, p=0.04). Table 1. In the multivariate analysis (including all baseline characteristics with a p value <0.05 as independent variables), shorter procedural time was a significant predictor of lower odds of unfavorable outcome (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28, 0.85, p=0.012). The rates of favorable outcomes were significantly higher when the procedural time was <60 minutes compared with ≥60 minutes (62% vs 45%, p=0.020). Conclusion: Procedural time in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke is an important determinant of favorable outcomes in those with near complete or complete recanalization.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.018
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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