MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4213079416 · doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.36

Abstract 36: Endovascular Thrombectomy Beyond 24 Hours From Last Known Well: <i>A Pooled Multicenter International Cohort</i>

2022· article· en· W4213079416 on OpenAlexaff
Amrou Sarraj, Ameer E Hassan, Michael Abraham, Nathan Manning, Dennis Cordato, Timothy Kleinig, Nitin Goyal, Spiros Blackburn, Margy McCullough‐Hicks, Marc Ribó, Teddy Y. Wu, Jordi Blasco, Navdeep Sangha, Juan F. Arenillas, Adam N. Wallace, Deep Pujara, Faris Shaker, Mercedes de Lera Alfonso, Arturo Renú, Marta Olivé‐Gadea, Daniel Gibson, Colleen Lechtenberg, Laith Maali, Mohammad A Abdulrazzak, Tareq S Almaghrabi, James Beharry, Balaji Krishnaiah, Megan Miller, Najwa Mohd Khalil, Gagan Sharma, Aristeidis H. Katsanos, Ali Fadhil, Yin Hu, Clark Sitton, Sheryl Martin‐Schild, Georgios Tsivgoulis, Peter Mitchell, Adam S Arthur, Mark Parsons, James C. Grotta, Bruce Campbell, Gregory W. Albers

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortStroke (engine)Endovascular treatmentInternal medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Limited data are available on endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) efficacy and safety in large vessel occlusion (LVO) patients presenting >24hr from last known well (LKW). We compared outcomes between patients receiving EVT and best medical management (MM) in a multicenter international cohort. Methods: Consecutive patients with anterior circulation LVO presenting >24h after LKW from 13 centers from 7/2012-4/2021 were analyzed. Multivariable models for 90d mRS distribution and symptomatic ICH were adjusted for age, NIHSS, glucose, IV tPA, transfer status, clot location, time from LKW, CT ASPECTS and ischemic core (rCBF<30%) and Tmax >6s volumes. Results: Of 240 patients with a median (IQR) LKW to presentation 28.3h (24.9-38.2), 153 (64%) received EVT. Baseline characteristics were similar except for NIHSS (EVT: 13 (8-20) vs MM: 17 (10-22), p=0.005), CT ASPECTS (EVT: 8(6-9) vs MM: 4(3-6), p<0.001) and ischemic core 2.5(0-13) vs 15(0-71) mL, p<0.001. EVT was associated with a better shift in 90d mRS (acOR: 2.45, 95% CI=1.42-4.22, p=0.001), higher functional independence (42% vs 10%, aOR: 4.84, 95% CI=2.02-11.64, p<0.001) and numerically lower mortality (22% vs 42%, aOR: 0.50, 95% CI=0.23-1.06, p=0.071), Fig 1A. However, EVT was associated with numerically higher sICH (5.5% vs 0%, p=0.10). Following EVT, 82% achieved successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b-3), which was associated with better shift in 90d mRS (acOR: 5.82, 95% CI: 1.77-19.10, p=0.004), higher functional independence (44% vs 22%, aOR: 5.03, 95% CI: 0.87-29.12, p=0.07) and lower mortality (20% vs 52%, aOR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.57, p=0.01), Fig 1B. Conclusions: EVT may be associated with better functional outcomes, despite numerically increased risk of sICH in patients presenting with anterior circulation LVO beyond 24 hours. Further prospective studies are warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→