Impact of renal impairment on short-term outcomes following endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The impact of renal impairment on the outcomes of patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with endovascular thrombectomy was relatively limited and contradictory. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate this. Aims We registered a protocol in September 2020 and searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar accordingly. Renal impairment was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . Predefined outcomes included functional independence (defined as a modified Rankin Scale of 0, 1, or 2) at three months, successful reperfusion, mortality, and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage. Summary of review Eleven studies involving 3453 patients were included. For the unadjusted outcomes, renal impairment was associated with fewer functional independence (odds ratio (OR), 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.39–0.62) and higher mortality (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 2.03–3.21). Renal impairment was not associated with successful reperfusion (OR, 0.80; 95% CI 0.63–1.00) and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 0.95–2.10). For the adjusted outcomes, results derived from a multivariate meta-analysis were consistent with the respective unadjusted outcomes: functional independence (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45–0.77), mortality (OR, 2.23, 95% CI, 1.45–3.43), and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.85–2.10). Conclusions We presented the first systematic review to demonstrate that renal impairment is associated with fewer functional independence and higher mortality. Future endovascular thrombectomy studies should publish complete renal estimated glomerular filtration rate data to facilitate prognostic studies and permit estimated glomerular filtration rate to be analyzed in a continuous variable. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020191309
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 | 0.014 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.032 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".