Heterogeneity of the Relative Benefits of TICI 2c/3 over TICI 2b50/2b67
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Purpose Incomplete reperfusion after mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is associated with a poor outcome. Rescue therapy would potentially benefit some patients with an expanded treatment in cerebral ischemia score (eTICI) 2b50/2b67 reperfusion but also harbors increased risks. The relative benefits of eTICI 2c/3 over eTICI 2b50/67 in clinically important subpopulations were analyzed. Methods Retrospective analysis of our institutional database for all patients with occlusion of the intracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) or the M1/M2 segment undergoing MT and final reperfusion of ≥eTICI 2b50 (903 patients). The heterogeneity in subgroups of different time metrics, age, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), number of retrieval attempts, Alberta Stroke Programme Early CT Score (ASPECTS) and site of occlusion using interaction terms (p i ) was analyzed. Results The presence of eTICI 2c/3 was associated with better outcomes in most subgroups. Time metrics showed no interaction of eTICI 2c/3 over eTICI 2b50/2b67 and clinical outcomes (onset to reperfusion p i = 0.77, puncture to reperfusion p i = 0.65, onset to puncture p i = 0.63). An eTICI 2c/3 had less consistent association with mRS ≤2 in older patients (>82 years, p i = 0.038) and patients with either lower NIHSS (≤9) or very high NIHSS (>19, p i = 0.01). Regarding occlusion sites, the beneficial effect of eTICI 2c/3 was absent for occlusions in the M2 segments (aOR 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33–1.59, p i = 0.018). Conclusion Beneficial effect of eTICI 2c/3 over eTICI 2b50/2b67 only decreased in older patients, M2-occlusions and patients with either low or very high NIHSS. Improving eTICI 2b50/2b67 to eTICI 2c/3 in those subgroups may be more often futile.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".