Risks of Undersizing Stent Retriever Length Relative to Thrombus Length in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Results regarding the association of thrombus length, stent retriever length, and recanalization success in patients with acute ischemic stroke are inconsistent. We hypothesized that the ratio of thrombus length to stent retriever length may be of particular relevance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing stent retriever thrombectomy at our institution between January 2010 and December 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Thrombus length was assessed by measuring the susceptibility vessel sign on SWI using a 1.5T or 3T MR imaging scanner. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine the association between thrombus length, stent retriever length, and thrombus length/stent retriever length ratio with first-pass recanalization, overall recanalization, and embolization in new territories. Results are shown as adjusted ORs with 95% CIs. Additional mediation analyses were performed to test for indirect effects on first-pass recanalization and overall recanalization success. RESULTS: The main analysis included 418 patients (mean age, 74.9 years). Increasing stent retriever length was associated with first-pass recanalization. Decreasing thrombus length and lower thrombus length/stent retriever length ratios were associated with first-pass recanalization and overall recanalization. Thrombus length and stent retriever length showed no association with first-pass recanalization or overall recanalization once thrombus length/stent retriever length ratio was factored in, while thrombus length/stent retriever length ratio remained a significant factor in both models (adjusted OR, 0.316 [95% CI, 0.112–0.892]; P = .030 and adjusted OR, = 0.366 [95% CI, 0.194–0.689]; P = .002). Mediation analyses showed that decreasing thrombus length and increasing stent retriever length had a significant indirect effect on first-pass recanalization mediated through thrombus length/stent retriever length ratio. The only parameter associated with embolization in new territories was an increasing thrombus length/stent retriever length ratio (adjusted OR, 5.079 [95% CI, 1.332–19.362]; P = .017). CONCLUSIONS: Information about thrombus and stent length is more valuable when combined. High thrombus length/stent retriever length ratios, which may raise the risk of unsuccessful recanalization and embolization in new territories, should be avoided by adapting stent retriever selection to thrombus length whenever possible.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".