MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013143701 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.00170

Effect of Conscious Sedation vs. General Anesthesia on Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Mechanical Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

2020· article· en· W3013143701 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSedationStroke (engine)AnesthesiaModified Rankin ScaleRandomized controlled trialHemodynamicsMortality rateSurgeryCardiologyIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Although several studies have compared conscious sedation (CS) with general anesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing mechanical thrombectomy (MT), there has been no affirmative conclusion. We conducted this trial to assess whether CS is superior to GA for patients undergoing MT for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Methods: AIS patients with anterior circulation large vascular occlusion (LVO) were randomized into two groups. The primary outcome was modified Rankin scale [mRS] score (0–2) at 90d after stroke. Secondary outcomes included intraprocedural hemodynamics, time metrics, successful recanalization, neurointerventionalist satisfaction score, National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) at 48 h post intervention, mortality at discharge and 3 months after stroke, and complications. Results: Compared with the CS group, heart rate was significantly lower at T1–T8 in the GA group except at T4 (P20% fall in MAP, pre-recanalization time spent with >20% fall in MAP, neurointerventionalist satisfaction, successful recanalization rate, NIHSS and ASPECTS scores at 48 h post intervention, and mortality rate at discharge and 3 months after stroke (P>.05). The cerebral infarction rate at 30d was greater in the CS group, but not significantly (P>.05). There were no differences in complication rates except for pneumonia (P>.05). Conversion rate from CS to GA was 9.52%. Conclusion: Anesthetic management with GA or CS during MT had no differential impact on the functional outcomes and mortality at discharge or 3 months after stroke in AIS patients, but CS led to more stable hemodynamics and lower incidence of pneumonia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.296 · 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