MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391438286 · doi:10.1161/str.55.suppl_1.152

Abstract 152: Endovascular Therapy versus Medical Management for Acute Ischemic Stroke With Large Infarct: A Time-Benefit Relationship Analysis

2024· article· en· W4391438286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guangxiong Yuan, Hongfei Sang, Thanh N. Nguyen, Xiaochuan Huo, Yuesong Pan, Mengxing Wang, Zhongming Qiu, Lei Liu, Jeffrey L. Saver, Zhongrong Miao

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Medical therapyIschemic strokeAcute strokeMyocardial infarctionCardiologyInternal medicineEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineIschemiaTissue plasminogen activator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Recent randomized trials demonstrated the benefit of endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke with large infarct. We aimed to characterize the effect of time to treatment on the benefit of endovascular therapy compared to medical management among patients with acute large ischemic stroke. Methods: Analysis the Endovascular Therapy in Acute Anterior Circulation Large Vessel Occlusive Patients with a Large Infarct Core trial (ANGEL-ASPECT), which was a multicenter, randomized trial at 46 comprehensive stroke centers in China from August 2020 to October 2022. Onset to arterial puncture time (OPT) associated with outcomes of endovascular therapy were analyzed as a category and continuous variable. The primary outcome was favorable outcome (modified Rankin scale 0-3) at 90 days. Secondary outcomes included degree of disability (modified Rankin scale range), symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, any intracranial hemorrhage, and mortality. Results: Among 455 eligible patients, the median age was 68 years, and median Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score was 3 (interquartile range 3-4). Compared with medical management alone, endovascular therapy plus medical management was associated with higher rates of favorable outcome with OPT within 6 hours (44.4% vs 29.9%, adjusted odds ratio[aOR] 2.78 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-6.32]), 6-12 hours (45.7% vs 29.6%, aOR 2.39 [95% CI 1.21-4.71]), but not in OPT beyond 12 hours (51.6% vs 41.4%, aOR 2.05 [95% CI, 0.88-4.77]). The benefit in favorable outcome became nonsignificant after OPT of 13 hours and 22 minutes. In three OPT intervals, the odds of better disability outcome with endovascular therapy plus medical management than medical management alone were observed; the rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality were similar, though the rates of any intracranial hemorrhage increased. Conclusion: In patients with large cerebral infarction, endovascular therapy plus medical management was efficacious in improving functional outcomes with acceptable safety in a broad time window of 0 to 24 hours, but greater benefit was observed with earlier treatment. A pooled analysis with larger sample size is needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke→Same topicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management→French-language works237,207→