Atherosclerotic ICA stenosis coinciding with ICA asymmetry associated with Circle of Willis variations can mimic near-occlusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Differentiating carotid near-occlusion (tight atherosclerotic stenosis causing distal artery size reduction) from conventional stenosis is the first step when grading carotid stenoses with NASCET method. The internal carotid artery (ICA) can be asymmetrically associated with Circle of Willis variations. When such ICA asymmetry coincides with stenosis, it may mimic near-occlusion. We studied ICA anatomical variant prevalence in 4042 consecutive CTA exams from all indications, 53 excluded due to carotid occlusion, 814 with any ≥ 50% steno-occlusive disease intra- or extracranially, 3228 without. Of the 3989 included cases, 568 (14%) had ICA asymmetry, of which 335 (59%) were from associated with Circle of Willis variations. Of 3228 patients without ≥ 50% stenosis or other steno-occlusive disease intra- and extracranially; 257 (8.0%) demonstrated ICA asymmetry associated with Circle of Willis variations, equally common among sexes and age unrelated and most frequently attributed to an ipsilateral A1 hypoplasia/aplasia, less often attributed to large contralateral posterior communicating artery. As ICA asymmetry associated with Circle of Willis variations are common, caution should be exercised diagnosing near-occlusion on asymmetry alone.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".