Sex Differences in Outcomes after Endovascular Thrombectomy for Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) is the standard of care for patients with large-vessel occlusion acute ischemic stroke (AIS). There may be differing recanalization effectiveness based on patients' sex, and understanding such variations can improve patient outcomes by adjusting for differences. We aimed to assess the sex differences in outcome after EVT for patients with AIS. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 250 consecutive AIS patients who underwent EVT from July 2019 to February 2022 across two large comprehensive tertiary care stroke centers in China. Outcomes of male patients were compared to females, where poor outcome was defined as a modified Rankin score (mRS) of 3-6 at 90 days. RESULTS: Male patients had higher rates of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) (12.50% vs. 4.05%, p = 0.042) and higher hospitalization costs (114,541.08 vs. 105,790.27 RMB, p = 0.024). Male patients also had a longer median onset-to-needle time (ONT) (146.00 [104.00, 202.00] versus 120.00 [99.25, 144.75], p = 0.026). However, there were no differences in hospitalization length (p = 0.251), 90-day favorable outcome (p = 0.952), and 90-day mortality (p = 0.931) between the sexes. CONCLUSION: Female patients had lower hospitalization costs and sICH rates than males after EVT for AIS. Identifying such differences and implementing measures, including adaptations to workflow optimization, would help to reduce the ONT and last known normal-to-puncture time seen in males to improve patient outcomes. Despite such variations, favorable outcomes and mortality are similar in female and male AIS patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".