Supplementary Material for: Endovascular Management of Acute Ischemic Strokes with Tandem Occlusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<b><i>Background:</i></b> Ischemic strokes with tandem occlusions are associated with a poor prognosis. Recent studies demonstrating the effectiveness of endovascular treatment for large vessel occlusions have shown less impressive results in patients with tandem occlusions than in those with isolated intracranial occlusions. Also, the indications and effects of carotid stenting remain unclear. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> From a prospectively gathered registry, we analyzed data of 70 consecutive patients who underwent mechanical endovascular treatment for acute stroke with tandem occlusions from November 2011 to August 2014. Clinical (including demographics, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), and stroke etiology), imaging (including diffusion-weighted imaging-Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score), and endovascular treatment data were assessed and reviewed in consensus by 2 observers. Good clinical outcome was defined as a modified Rankin Scale of ≤2 at 3-month follow-up. <b><i>Results:</i></b> At 3-month follow-up, 50.8% had a poor clinical outcome, including death in 13.4%. Lower NIHSS (initial, at day 1, and at discharge) and successful recanalization (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3) were associated with a good clinical outcome (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between patients with a good or poor clinical outcome in terms of intravenous (IV) tissue plasminogen activator use, delay between symptom onset and recanalization, and endovascular technique including the carotid stenting. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Despite the recent randomized control trials demonstrating the effectiveness of thrombectomy, there is still a research gap about tandem occlusions. This subtype of stroke, which usually responds poorly to IV thrombolysis, is also difficult to treat by endovascular means. Guidelines for the endovascular management of tandem occlusions are 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 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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.454 | 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".