Impact of Age and Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score 0 to 5 on Mechanical Thrombectomy Outcomes: Analysis From the STRATIS Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: This study investigates clinical outcomes after mechanical thrombectomy in adult patients with baseline Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) of 0 to 5. Methods: We included data from the STRATIS Registry (Systematic Evaluation of Patients Treated With Neurothrombectomy Devices for Acute Ischemic Stroke) from patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy within 8 hours of symptom onset and had available ASPECTS data adjudicated by an independent core laboratory. Angiographic and clinical outcomes were collected, including successful reperfusion (modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction ≥2b), functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score 0–2), 90-day mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours. Outcomes were stratified by ASPECTS scores and age. Results: Of the 984 patients enrolled, 763 had available ASPECTS data. Of these patients, 57 had ASPECTS of 0 to 5 with a median age of 63 years (interquartile range, 28–100), whereas 706 patients had ASPECTS of 6 to 10 with a median age of 70 years of age (interquartile range, 19–100). Ten patients had ASPECTS of 0 to 3 and 47 patients had ASPECTS of 4 to 5 at baseline. Successful reperfusion was achieved in 85.5% (47/55) in the ASPECTS of 0 to 5 group. Functional independence was achieved in 28.8% (15/52) in the ASPECTS of 0 to 5 versus 59.7% (388/650) in the 6 to 10 group ( P <0.001). Mortality rates were 30.8% (16/52) in the ASPECTS of 0 to 5 and 13.4% (87/650) in the 6 to 10 group ( P <0.001). sICH rates were 7.0% (4/57) in the ASPECTS of 0 to 5 and 0.9% (6/682) in the 6 to 10 group ( P <0.001). No patients aged >75 years with ASPECTS of 0 to 5 (0/12) achieved functional independence versus 44.8% (13/29) of those age ≤65 ( P =0.005). Conclusions: Patients <65 years of age with large core infarction (ASPECTS 0–5) have better rates of functional independence and lower rates of mortality compared with patients >75 years of age. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02239640.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".