MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304014820 · doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2022.3248

Association of Atrial Septal Aneurysm and Shunt Size With Stroke Recurrence and Benefit From Patent Foramen Ovale Closure

2022· article· en· W4304014820 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Louis Mas, Jeffrey L. Saver, Scott E. Kasner, Jason Nelson, John D. Carroll, Gilles Châtellier, Geneviève Dérumeaux, Anthony J. Furlan, Howard C. Herrmann, Peter Jüni, Jong S. Kim, Benjamin Koethe, Pil Hyung Lee, Bénédicte Lefebvre, Heinrich P. Mattle, Bernhard Meier, Mark Reisman, Richard W. Smalling, Lars Søndergaard, Jae‐Kwan Song, David E. Thaler, David M. Kent

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsPatent foramen ovaleMedicineShunt (medical)CardiologyInternal medicineAneurysmStroke (engine)Foramen ovale (heart)SurgeryMigraine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: The Patent Foramen Ovale (PFO)-Associated Stroke Causal Likelihood classification system combines information regarding noncardiac patient features (vascular risk factors, infarct topography) and PFO features (shunt size and presence of atrial septal aneurysm [ASA]) to classify patients into 3 validated categories of responsiveness to treatment with PFO closure. However, the distinctive associations of shunt size and ASA, alone and in combination, have not been completely delineated. Objective: To evaluate the association of PFO closure with stroke recurrence according to shunt size and/or the presence of an ASA. Design, Setting, and Participants: Pooled individual patient data from 6 randomized clinical trials conducted from February 2000 to October 2017 that compared PFO closure with medical therapy. Patients in North America, Europe, Australia, Brazil, and South Korea with PFO-associated stroke were included. Analysis was completed in January 2022. Exposures: Transcatheter PFO closure plus antithrombotic therapy vs antithrombotic therapy alone, stratified into 4 groups based on the combination of 2 features: small vs large PFO shunt size and the presence or absence of an ASA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Recurrent ischemic stroke. Results: A total of 121 recurrent ischemic strokes occurred in the pooled 3740 patients (mean [SD] age, 45 [10] years; 1682 [45%] female) during a median (IQR) follow-up of 57 (23.7-63.8) months. Treatment with PFO closure was associated with reduced risk for recurrent ischemic stroke (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.28-0.60]; P < .001). The reduction in hazard for recurrent stroke was greater for patients with both a large shunt and an ASA (aHR, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.06-0.35]) than for large shunt without ASA (aHR, 0.27 [95% CI, 0.14-0.56]), small shunt with ASA (aHR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.17-0.78]), and small shunt without ASA (aHR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.41-1.13]) (interaction P = .02). At 2 years, the absolute risk reduction of recurrent stroke was greater (5.5% [95% CI, 2.7-8.3]) in patients with large shunt and ASA than for patients in the other 3 categories (1.0% for all). Conclusions and Relevance: Patients with both a large shunt and an ASA showed a substantially greater beneficial association with PFO closure than patients with large shunt alone, patients with small shunt and ASA, and patients with neither large shunt nor ASA. These findings, combined with other patient features, may inform shared patient-clinician decision-making.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations46
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA NeurologySame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207