Recanalization and outcomes after cerebral venous thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Recanalization in cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) can begin as early as 1 week after initiating therapeutic anticoagulation. The clinical significance of recanalization remains uncertain. Objectives: We aimed to investigate the association between recanalization and functional outcomes and explored predictors of recanalization. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane library) to identify: (1) patients with CVT aged ≥18 years treated with anticoagulation only; (2) case series, cohort, or randomized controlled trial studies; and (3) reported recanalization rates and functional outcomes using either a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) or sequelae of CVT at last follow-up. Meta-analysis was performed using pooled odds ratios (ORs) with exploration of sex and age effects using meta-regression. Results: = 0.008). Epilepsy and visual sequelae were not associated with recanalization. Conclusions: Absence of recanalization was associated with worse functional outcomes, CVT recurrence, and headache, but outcomes were modified by sex. The degree of recanalization was significant in relation to headache outcomes, where partial compared with complete recanalization resulted in a greater likelihood of residual headache. Prospective studies with common timing of repeat clinical-neuroimaging assessments will help to better ascertain the relationship and directionality between the degree of recanalization and outcomes.
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 | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".