Noncontrast Computed Tomography e-Stroke Infarct Volume Is Similar to RAPID Computed Tomography Perfusion in Estimating Postreperfusion Infarct Volumes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The e-Stroke Suite software (Brainomix, Oxford, United Kingdom) is a tool designed for the automated quantification of The Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score and ischemic core volumes on noncontrast computed tomography (NCCT). We sought to compare the prediction of postreperfusion infarct volumes and the clinical outcomes across NCCT e-Stroke software versus RAPID (IschemaView, Menlo Park, CA) computed tomography perfusion measurements. METHODS: All consecutive patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion stroke presenting at a tertiary care center between September 2010 and November 2018 who had available baseline infarct volumes on both NCCT e-Stroke Suite software and RAPID CTP as well as final infarct volume (FIV) measurements and achieved complete reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale 2c-3) post-thrombectomy were included. The associations between estimated baseline ischemic core volumes and FIV as well as 90-day functional outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: <0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that e-Stroke software and CTP performance was similar in the early and late (>6 hours) treatment windows. Multivariate analysis showed that both e-Stroke software NCCT baseline ischemic core volume (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97-0.99]) and RAPID CTP ischemic core volume (adjusted odds ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97-0.99]) were independently and comparably associated with good outcome (modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2) at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: NCCT e-Stroke Suite software performed similarly to RAPID CTP in assessing postreperfusion FIV and functional outcomes for both early- and late-presenting patients. NCCT e-Stroke volumes seems to represent a viable alternative in centers where access to advanced imaging is limited. Moreover, the future development of fusion maps of NCCT and CTP ischemic core estimates may improve upon the current performance of these tools as applied in isolation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".