High Triglyceride Glucose Index Is Associated with Poor Outcomes in Ischemic Stroke Patients after Reperfusion Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The triglyceride glucose index (TyG index) is a simple and reliable surrogate marker of insulin resistance (IR) that can predict functional outcomes and mortality after acute ischemic stroke (AIS). However, it is unclear whether the TyG index is associated with functional outcomes in patients with stroke who receive reperfusion therapy. Thus, we aimed to explore the prognostic value of the TyG index for the clinical outcomes of patients with AIS who underwent reperfusion therapy. METHODS: We retrospectively assessed patients with AIS, with occlusion of either the middle cerebral artery or internal carotid artery, who were evaluated using multiphase computed tomography angiography (mCTA) and received reperfusion therapy. The TyG index was calculated as "ln [fasting glucose level (mg/dL) × triglyceride level (mg/dL)]/2." Collateral status was evaluated using mCTA based on the University of Calgary Scale. Clinical outcomes included 3-month functional outcomes, early neurological deterioration, recanalization status, and hemorrhagic transformation. RESULTS: In all, 183 subjects (age 69.5 ± 12.4 years; men, 59.0%) were enrolled. The median initial National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 15.0 (interquartile range [IQR] 11-18). The median TyG index was 4.8 (IQR, 4.6-5.1), and 158 patients had TyG levels >4.49, which represents the presence of IR. On univariate analysis, a higher TyG index was associated with both early neurological deterioration (18.4 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.041) and a 3-month poor functional outcome (mRS3-6) (61.4 vs. 32.0%, p = 0.011). After adjusting for multiple variables, including age, sex, type of reperfusion therapy, recanalization status, initial stroke severity, type of stroke, and history of hypertension and diabetes, high TyG index remained an independent predictor of a poor 3-month functional outcome (adjusted OR, 5.22; p = 0.014). However, TyG levels were not significantly associated with collateral status (p = 0.756). CONCLUSIONS: IR, represented by a high TyG index, may predict poor 3-month functional outcomes in patients with AIS who undergo reperfusion therapy.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".