Impact of Antithrombotic Agents on Radiological Lesion Progression in Acute Traumatic Brain Injury: A CENTER-TBI Propensity-Matched Cohort Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An increasing number of elderly patients are being affected by traumatic brain injury (TBI) and a significant proportion are on pre-hospital antithrombotic therapy for cardio- or cerebrovascular indications. We have quantified the impact of antiplatelet/anticoagulant (APAC) agents on radiological lesion progression in acute TBI, using a novel, semi-automated approach to volumetric lesion measurement, and explored the impact of use on clinical outcomes in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We used a 1:1 propensity-matched cohort design, matching controls to APAC users based on demographics, baseline clinical status, pre-injury comorbidities, and injury severity. Subjects were selected from a pool of patients enrolled in CENTER-TBI with computed tomography (CT) scan at admission and repeated within 7 days of injury. We calculated absolute changes in volume of intraparenchymal, extra-axial, intraventricular, and total intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) between scans, and compared volume of hemorrhagic progression, proportion of patients with significant degree of progression (>25% of initial volume), proportion with new ICH on follow-up CT, as well as clinical course and outcomes. A total of 316 patients were included (158 APAC users; 158 controls). The mean volume of progression was significantly higher in the APAC group for extra-axial (3.1 vs. 1.3 mL, p = 0.01), but not intraparenchymal (3.8 vs. 4.6 mL, p = 0.65), intraventricular (0.2 vs. 0.0 mL, p = 0.79), or total intracranial hemorrhage (ICH; 7.0 vs. 6.0 mL, p = 0.08). More patients had significant hemorrhage growth (54.1 vs. 37.0%, p = 0.003) and delayed ICH (4 of 18 vs. none; p = 0.04) in the APAC group compared with controls, but this was not associated with differences in length of stay (LOS), rates of neurosurgical intervention, mortality or Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOS-E) score at 6 months. Pre-injury use of antithrombotic agents was associated with greater expansion of extra-axial lesions, higher rates of significant hemorrhagic progression, and higher risk of delayed traumatic ICH, but this was not associated with worse clinical course or functional outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".