Low-flow extra-intracranial bypass in acute carotid and vertebrobasilar ischemic stroke (literature review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The effectiveness of the method of revascularization of the brain using extra‑intracranial bypass in chronic insufficiency of blood supply to the brain has been studied in several randomized multicenter studies. The analysis of available publications devoted to this technique for 10 years with acute strokes in the carotid basin and for 20 years with ischemic strokes in the vertebrobasilar basin was carried out. Aim. To improve the results of treatment of ischemic strokes with the help of emergency extra‑intracranial low‑flow bypasses in the acute and acute period. In 12 publications over the past 10 years, selected from the PubMed search engine, 194 cases of the use of emergency extra‑intracranial microbypasses in the acute and acute period of ischemic stroke in the carotid basin were identified, 127 cases of emergency extra‑intracranial bypass were found in 6 articles during the last 20 years in the acute phase of vertebra‑basilar area stroke. Middle patient age in carotid group was 61.9 years, and 65 years in vertebral patient’s group. The male / female ratio was 3 / 1. The main indications for the bypass creation were: worsening of neurologic deficit from 4 and more according to the Stroke Severity Scale of the US National Institutes of Health, mini mal or not significant computed tomography (CT) or diffusion‑weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW‑MRI) ischemia brain changes (not lower than 8 points on the scale of assessment of initial changes in the computed tomographic (CT) examination for stroke Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, ASPECTS), signs of significant brachiocephalic arteries atherosclerotic stenosis. In 83 carotid group cases perfusion‑diffusion mismatch was distinguished before bypass creation. In 111 carotid cases and in priority of vertebra‑basilar cases clinic‑diffusion mismatch was the only indication for emergency extra‑intracranial bypass creation. During the first 24 hours 65 % of carotid group bypass were performed, in other 35 % of cases bypasses were performed during 1 week after the stroke onset. There were 78 % of good results (<2 on the Rankin outcome scale, mRS) and 22 % of poor (mRS >2) in carotid stroke group. Mortality was 3 %. In vertebral group, coma was not contraindication for emergence extra‑intracranial bypass creation. In most cases, 70 % of bypass were performed between superficial temporal artery and superior cerebellar artery. Mortality in vertebral stroke group was 5 %, mostly because of somatic pathology worsening. Good results were achieved in76 % of cases. Conclusion. In some cases of atherosclerotic carotid and vertebrobasilar ischemic stroke, results of recovery can be approved greatly with use of emergency low‑flow extra‑intracranial bypass, if intravenous thrombolysis and endovascular tromboextraction were failed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".