Blood Pressure Trajectories and Outcomes After Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Data on systolic blood pressure (SBP) trajectories in the first 24 hours after endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) in acute ischemic stroke are limited. We sought to identify these trajectories and their relationship to outcomes. METHODS: We combined individual-level data from 5 studies of patients with acute ischemic stroke who underwent EVT and had individual blood pressure values after the end of the procedure. We used group-based trajectory analysis to identify the number and shape of SBP trajectories post-EVT. We used mixed effects regression models to identify associations between trajectory groups and outcomes adjusting for potential confounders and reported the respective adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and common odds ratios. RESULTS: There were 2640 total patients with acute ischemic stroke included in the analysis. The most parsimonious model identified 4 distinct SBP trajectories, that is, general directional patterns after repeated SBP measurements: high, moderate-high, moderate, and low. Patients in the higher blood pressure trajectory groups were older, had a higher prevalence of vascular risk factors, presented with more severe stroke syndromes, and were less likely to achieve successful recanalization after the EVT. In the adjusted analyses, only patients in the high-SBP trajectory were found to have significantly higher odds of early neurological deterioration (aOR, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.20-2.82]), intracranial hemorrhage (aOR, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.31-2.59]), mortality (aOR, 1.75 [95% CI, 1.21-2.53), death or disability (aOR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.15-2.31]), and worse functional outcomes (adjusted common odds ratio,1.92 [95% CI, 1.47-2.50]). CONCLUSIONS: Patients follow distinct SBP trajectories in the first 24 hours after an EVT. Persistently elevated SBP after the procedure is associated with unfavorable short-term and long-term 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".