Abstract TP457: Intraventricular and Intravenous Milrinone for Cerebral Vasospasm in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Cerebral vasospasm (CVS) is a complication of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Intraventricular milrinone (IVtM) and intravenous milrinone (IVM) have been studied for treatment of CVS. We aimed to determine the effect of milrinone therapy on clinical and transcranial Doppler (TCD) measures of CVS. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with aSAH treated with IVtM at a single tertiary center between 2016 and 2018. Patients were treated with IVtM if they had symptomatic CVS or TCD suggestive of critical CVS that persisted despite blood pressure augmentation or endovascular therapies. Nimodipine was given as standard of care. A subset of patients were also treated with IVM, which was dosed in a standard fashion based on Montreal Neurological Institute protocol. We collected demographic data, TCD mean flow velocity and pulsatility index, angiographic data, as well as utilization and frequency of IVtM and IVM. Results: Twenty-eight patients in our cohort had modified Fisher grade 4 (57%) or grade 3 (25%) and median Hunt-Hess score of 3 (IQR 2, 4). Twenty-one of 28 patients were treated with IVtM+IVM. Seven (25%) who received IVtM alone had no significant improvement in TCD velocities or reduction in symptomatic CVS (p=0.611). Patients received between 1 and 30 doses of IVtM. There was no significant improvement with time or with number of IVtM doses IVtM. There was also no significant improvement in TCD velocities of CVS patients nor reduction in symptomatic CVS with IVtM+IVM (p=0.69). The number of IVtM doses correlated with an increased discharge mRS (p=0.05). There were no direct complications due to IVtM or IVM. Conclusion: Neither IVtM+IVM nor IVtM alone appear to be effective treatment of CVS in aSAH. Our data represent one of the first case series reporting IVtM and IVtM+IVM utilization for the treatment of CVS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".