Benefit of successful reperfusion achieved by endovascular thrombectomy for patients with ischemic stroke and moderate pre-stroke disability (mRS 3): results from the MR CLEAN Registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pre-stroke dependent patients (modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) ≥3) were excluded from most trials on endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) in the anterior circulation. Therefore, little evidence exists for EVT in those patients. We aimed to investigate the safety and benefit of EVT in pre-stroke patients with mRS score 3. METHODS: We used data from the Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry. All patients treated with EVT for anterior circulation AIS with pre-stroke mRS 3 were included. We assessed causes for dependence and compared patients with successful reperfusion (defined as expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Ischemia scale (eTICI) 2b-3) to patients without successful reperfusion. We used regression analyses with pre-specified adjustments. Our primary outcome was 90-day mRS 0-3 (functional improvement or return to baseline). RESULTS: A total of 192 patients were included, of whom 82 (43%) had eTICI <2b and 108 (56%) eTICI ≥2b. The median age was 80 years (IQR 73-87). Fifty-one of the 192 patients (27%) suffered from previous stroke and 36/192 (19%) had cardiopulmonary disease. Patients with eTICI ≥2b more often returned to their baseline functional state or improved (n=26 (26%) vs n=15 (19%); adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.91 (95% CI 1.08 to 7.82)) and had lower mortality rates (n=49 (49%) vs n=50 (64%); aOR 0.42 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.93)) compared with patients with eTICI <2b. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with AIS with pre-stroke mRS 3 comprise a heterogenous group of disability causes, we observed improved outcomes when patients achieved successful reperfusion after EVT.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".