Endovascular therapy for acute intracranial large vessel occlusion due to atherothrombosis: Multicenter historical registry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atherothrombotic stroke-related large vessel occlusion (AT-LVO) is caused by two etiologies, the intracranial artery occlusion due to in situ occlusion (intracranial group) or due to embolism from cervical carotid occlusion or stenosis (tandem group). The prognosis and reocclusion rate of each etiology after endovascular therapy (EVT) is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a historical multicenter registry study at 51 Japanese centers to compare the prognoses of AT-LVO between two etiologies. The primary outcome was the incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke or reocclusion of the treated vessels within 90 days after EVT. Each of the primary outcome means the incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke and reocclusion of the treated vessels within 90 days after EVT. RESULTS: We analyzed 582 patients (338 in the intracranial group and 244 in the tandem group). Patients in the intracranial group were younger (mean 71.9 vs 74.5, p=0.003), more of them were female and fewer of them were current smokers than those in the tandem group. In the tandem group, the patients' National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score on admission was higher (13 vs 15, p=0.006), onset to puncture time was shorter (299 [145-631] vs 232 [144-459] minutes, p=0.03) and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) was lower (8 [7-9] vs 8 [6-9], p=0.0002). The primary outcome was higher in the intracranial group (22.5% vs 8.2%, p<0.0001). However, any ICH and death were not significantly different in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of recurrent ischemic stroke or reocclusion after EVT for AT-LVO was higher in the intracranial group.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".