Abstract 1122‐000031: Reasons Thrombectomy Candidates Become Ineligible After Transfer for Treatment in a Hub‐And‐Spoke Telestroke Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction : The care of emergent large vessel occlusion (ELVO) stroke patients has been revolutionized by endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). Given its robust efficacy, it is crucial to optimize delivery to eligible patients. Within hub‐and‐spoke hospital system models, some patients first present to distant spoke hospitals and require transfer to hub hospitals for EVT. We sought to understand reasons EVT candidates become ineligible after transfer for treatment. Methods : Consecutive EVT candidates presenting to 25 spokes from 2018 to 2020 with pre‐transfer CTA‐defined ELVO and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score ≥6 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Outcomes of interest included hub EVT, reasons for EVT ineligibility, and 90‐day functional independence (modified Rankin Scale, mRS ≤2). Results : 258 patients were identified with median age 70 years (IQR 60–81) and 50% female. 44% underwent EVT upon hub arrival, of which 87% achieved Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction 2b‐3 reperfusion. Compared to EVT‐eligible patients, ineligible patients were older (73 vs 68 years, p = 0.04), had lower NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS, 10 vs 16, p<0.0001), longer LKW‐hub arrival time (8.4 vs 4.6 hours, p<0.0001), and received less IV alteplase (32% vs 45%, p = 0.04). The clinical reasons cited for becoming EVT ineligible upon hub arrival included large established infarct (49%), mild symptoms (33%), recanalization (6%), distal occlusion location (5%), subocclusive lesion (3%), and goals of care (3%). Becoming EVT ineligible independently reduced the odds of 90‐day functional independence (aOR = 0.26, 95%CI = 0.12,0.56; p = 0.001), even when controlling for age, NIHSS, and LKW‐hub arrival time. Conclusions : Approaches to increase EVT eligibility among ELVO transfers may improve long term outcomes. A primary reason for becoming EVT ineligible is infarct growth. Future studies should explore triaging patients directly to EVT‐capable hubs when feasible, improving inter‐hospital transfer times, supporting ischemic penumbra before EVT, and developing novel neuroprotective agents.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".