Validation of the transcranial Doppler rescue criteria for mechanical thrombectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Transcranial Doppler (TCD) identifies acute stroke patients with arterial occlusion where treatment may not effectively open the blocked vessel. This study aimed to examine the clinical utility and prognostic value of TCD flow findings in patients enrolled in a multicenter prospective study (CLOTBUST-PRO). METHODS: Patients enrolled with intracranial occlusion on computed tomography angiography (CTA) who underwent urgent TCD evaluation before intravenous thrombolysis was included in this analysis. TCD findings were assessed using the mean flow velocity (MFV) ratio, comparing the reciprocal ratios of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) depths bilaterally (affected MCA-to-contralateral MCA MFV [aMCA/cMCA MFV ratio]). RESULTS: A total of 222 patients with intracranial occlusion on CTA were included in the study (mean age: 64 ± 14 years, 62% men). Eighty-eight patients had M1 MCA occlusions; baseline mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score was 16, and a 24-hour mean NIHSS score was 10 points. An aMCA/cMCA MFV ratio of <.6 had a sensitivity of 99%, specificity of 16%, positive predictive value (PV) of 60%, and negative PV of 94% for identifying large vessel occlusion (LVO) including M1 MCA, terminal internal carotid artery, or tandem ICA/MCA. Thrombolysis in Brain Ischemia scale, with (grade ≥1) compared to without flow (grade 0), showed a sensitivity of 17.1%, specificity of 86.9%, positive PV of 62%, and negative PV of 46% for identifying LVO. CONCLUSIONS: TCD is a valuable modality for evaluating arterial circulation in acute ischemic stroke patients, demonstrating significant potential as a screening tool for intravenous/intra-arterial lysis protocols.
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".