MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Outcome of intracranial flow diversion according to the antiplatelet regimen used: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2954006935 on OpenAlex
Anna Podlasek, Abdul Aziz Al Sultan, Zarina Assis, Nima Kashani, Mayank Goyal, Mohammed Almekhlafi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroInterventional Surgery · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsOntario Brain InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrasugrelTicagrelorMedicineClopidogrelRegimenInternal medicineStroke (engine)AspirinIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic complications are not uncommon in patients undergoing neurointerventional procedures. The use of flow diverting stents is associated with higher risks of these complications despite current dual antiplatelet regimens. OBJECTIVE: To explore contemporary evidence on the safety of emerging dual antiplatelet regimens in flow diverting stenting procedures. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify relevant articles in electronic databases, and relevant references. Studies reporting the complications and mortality of flow diverting stenting procedures using acetyl salicylic acid (ASA) + ticagrelor or ASA + prasugrel compared with ASA + clopidogrel were included. RESULTS: Of 452 potentially relevant studies, we identified 49 studies (2526 patients) which reported the safety of ticagrelor or prasugrel for pooled analysis, and five studies (1005 patients) for meta-analysis. The pooled overall mortality in all studies was 2.14%, ischemic complications 6.89%, and hemorrhagic complications 3.68%. The use of ticagrelor or prasugrel was associated with a lower risk of mortality compared with clopidogrel (RR=4.57, 95% CI 1.23 to 16.99; p=0.02). Considering ischemic events, ASA + clopidogrel was as safe as ASA + prasugrel (RR=0.55, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.74; p=0.47) and ASA + ticagrelor (RR=0.74, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.74; p=0.49). ASA +ticagrelor was not associated with a higher risk of hemorrhagic complications (RR=0.92, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.16; p=0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence suggests that dual antiplatelet regimens including ticagrelor or prasugrel are safe for patients undergoing flow diversion procedures. Regimens using ticagrelor were associated with better survival than those using clopidogrel in the included studies.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.020
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.222 · 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