Endovascular treatment for anterior circulation large-vessel occlusion ischemic stroke with low ASPECTS: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients presenting with Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) 0-5 has not yet proven safe and effective by clinical trials. Objectives: The aim of the study was to assess whether EVT in AIS patients presenting with low ASPECTS is beneficial. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of available studies in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Data sources and Methods: We have searched MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and reference lists of articles published until 28 May 2022 with the aim to calculate (1) modified Rankin scale (mRS) score 0-3 at 3 months, (2) mRS score 0-2 at 3 months, (3) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and (3) mortality at 3 months. Results: Overall, 24 eligible studies were included in the meta-analysis, comprising a total of 2539 AIS patients with ASPECTS 0-5 treated with EVT. The pooled proportion of EVT-treated patients achieving mRS 0-3 at 3 months was calculated at 38.4%. The pooled proportion of EVT-treated patients achieving mRS 0-2 at 3 months was 25.7%. Regarding safety outcomes, sICH occurred in 12.8% of patients. The 3-month pooled mortality was 30%. In pairwise meta-analysis, patients treated with EVT had a higher likelihood of achieving mRS 0-3 at 3 months compared with patients treated with best medical therapy (BMT, OR: 2.41). sICH occurred more frequently in EVT-treated patients compared with the BMT-treated patients (OR: 2.30). Mortality at 3 months was not different between the two treatment groups (OR: 0.71). Conclusion: EVT may be beneficial for AIS patients with low baseline ASPECTS despite an increased risk for sICH. Further data from randomized-controlled clinical trials are needed to elucidate the role of EVT in this subgroup of AIS patients. Registration: The protocol has been registered in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews PROSPERO; Registration Number: CRD42022334417.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.039 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".