Assessment of cerebrovascular reserve impairment using the breath-holding index in patients with leukoaraiosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have demonstrated that leukoaraiosis is associated with impaired cerebrovascular reserve function. However, the definitive hemodynamic changes that occur in leukoaraiosis are not clear, and there are many controversies. This study aimed to investigate hemodynamic changes in symptomatic leukoaraiosis using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography and the breath-holding test in a Chinese Han population, from northern China. A total of 203 patients who were diagnosed with ischemic stroke or clinical chronic progressive ischemic symptoms were enrolled in this study, including 97 males and 106 females, with an age range of 43-93 years. The severity of leukoaraiosis was evaluated according to the Fazekas grading scale, and patients were divided into four groups accordingly. Grade 0 was no leukoaraiosis, and grades I, II, and III were mild, moderate, and severe leukoaraiosis, respectively, with 44, 79, 44, and 36 cases in each group. Transcranial Doppler ultrasonography and the breath-holding test were performed. The mean blood flow velocity of the bilateral middle cerebral artery was measured and the breath-holding index was calculated. The breath holding index was correlated with leukoaraiosis severity and cognitive impairment. Patients with a low breath holding index presented poor performance in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and executive function tests. That is, the lower the breath holding index, the lower the scores for the MoCA and the higher for the trail-making test Parts A and B. These results indicate that the breath-holding index is a useful parameter for the evaluation of cerebrovascular reserve impairment in patients with leukoaraiosis. In addition, the breath-holding index can reflect cognitive dysfunction, providing a new insight into the pathophysiology of leukoaraiosis. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Fifth People's Hospital of Shenyang, China (approval No. 20160301) and registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR1800014421).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".