MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391382949 · doi:10.1136/jnis-2023-021366

Endovascular thrombectomy for large ischemic strokes: meta-analysis of six multicenter randomized controlled trials

2024· review· en· W4391382949 on OpenAlex
Huanwen Chen, Marco Colasurdo

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroInterventional Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialModified Rankin ScaleOdds ratioStroke (engine)Internal carotid arteryConfidence intervalClinical trialInternal medicineMiddle cerebral arteryOcclusionCardiologyIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Six randomized controlled trials have concluded their investigations on the efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for patients with large infarcts.To synthesize the results from six trials which met the inclusion criteria (RESCUE-Japan LIMIT, ANGEL-ASPECT, SELECT2, TESLA, TENSION, and LASTE) to provide high-level evidence and guide providers on optimizing EVT treatment decisions for patients presenting with large ischemic strokes seen on initial imaging. METHODS: Study and patient characteristics of the six included trials were collected, and 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) outcomes were tabulated. Generalized odds ratios (OR) of mRS score shift and utility-weighted mRS values were calculated for each study. Random-effects models were used to pool study outcomes. RESULTS: 922 patients received EVT, and 924 received medical management. Most patients had Alberta Stroke Program Early CT (ASPECT) scores of 3 to 5 and intracranial occlusion in the internal carotid artery (ICA) or the first segment of the middle cerebral artery (M1). EVT was significantly superior to medical management in terms of likelihood of better mRS score, functional independence (mRS score 0-2), and independent walking (mRS score 0-3) at 90 days, representing numbers needed to treat of 4.7 (95% CI 3.7 to 6.6), 7.1 (95% CI 5.6 to 9.6), and 10.6 (95% CI 8.2 to 14.8), respectively. EVT was not significantly associated with higher risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (1.7% (95% CI -0.32% to 3.72%), P=0.10). There was significant inter-study heterogeneity in mortality risk, which might have been due to differences in treatment time windows. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides strong evidence that EVT is effective for patients presenting within 6 hours of stroke onset, ASPECT scores of 3 to 5, and intracranial ICA or proximal M1 occlusion. Use of EVT beyond 6 hours or for more distal occlusions requires further investigation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0590.226
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it