MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175191343 · doi:10.1161/str.51.suppl_1.tp338

Abstract TP338: The Dynamic CT Angiography Spot Sign: Prevalence, Predictive Value, and Rate of Contrast Extravasation

2020· article· en· W3175191343 on OpenAlexaff
Dar Dowlatshahi, Hee Sahng Chung, Franco Momoli, Grant Stotts, Richard I. Aviv, M. Hogan, Andrew M. Demchuk, Santanu Chakraborty

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineExtravasationHematomaRadiologyContrast (vision)AngiographyPredictive value of testsNuclear medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Hematoma expansion is a predictor of poor clinical outcome in intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). The CT angiography (CTA) spot sign is a validated predictor of hematoma expansion, but its predictive performance is modest. This is in part because traditional “static” CTA can miss delayed spot signs, depending on the timing of image acquisition. Dynamic CTA (dCTA) can detect delayed spot sign formation and allows calculation of contrast extravasation rate. However, the predictive performance of a delayed “dynamic spot” and the relationship between rate of extravasation and hematoma expansion are not known. Our primary objective was to calculate the prevalence and predictive performance of the dynamic spot sign with dCTA. Our secondary objective was to determine whether the rate of contrast extravasation predicts significant hematoma expansion. Methods: We prospectively enrolled 79 patients who presented with primary ICH and underwent dCTA within 6 hours from onset. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of dCTA spot sign and its predictive performance for significant hematoma expansion (increase in hematoma by 6mL or 33% from baseline). For the secondary objective, we calculated the rate of contrast extravasation as the slope of the time curve from the first appearance of contrast at a spot sign to the maximal volume of contrast in 19 acquisitions over 60 seconds. We assessed the relationship between rate of extravasation and hematoma expansion using Mann-Whitney U test and logistic regression. Results: The prevalence of the dCTA spot sign was 45.6% (95% CI, 34.5-56.6%). Significant HE was seen in 58.1% (18/31) of spot-positive patients versus 29.0% (9/31) of spot-negative patients (P=0.04). The sensitivity and specificity of the dCTA spot sign in predicting significant HE was 67% and 63%, respectively. Median rate of extravasation was 0.0022 mL/min in patients with hematoma expansion vs 0.0013 mL/min in those without (p=0.05). Conclusion: Dynamic CTA had a higher spot sign prevalence than conventional CTA. While the sensitivity in predicting expansion was higher with dCTA, the specificity was lower, possibly due to a lower risk of expansion with delayed spot signs. The rate of extravasation was roughly double in patients with hematoma expansion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207