MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Age and Functional Outcomes in Patients With Large Ischemic Stroke Receiving Endovascular Thrombectomy

2024· article· en· W4401511579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurens Winkelmeier, Helge Kniep, Tobias D. Faizy, Christian Heitkamp, Ludovic Holtz, Lukas Meyer, Fabian Flottmann, Alexander Heitkamp, Maximilian Schell, Götz Thomalla, Jens Fiehler, Gabriel Broocks, Anna Allegiani, Jörg Berrouschot, Tobias Boeckh‐Behrens, Georg Böhner, Jan Borggrefe, Albrecht Bormann, Michael Braun, Franziska Dorn, Bernd Eckert, Ulrike Ernemann, Marielle Ernst, Christian Gerloff, Klaus Gröschel, Gerhard F. Hamann, Jörg Hattingen, Karl‐Heinz Henn, Fee Keil, Lars Kellert, Christoffer Kraemer, Ruben Mühl‐Benninghaus, Jan Liman, Alexander Ludolf, Christian H. Nolte, Omid Nikoubashman, Martina Petersen, Gabor C. Petzold, Sven Poli, Arno Reich, Christian Riedel, Joachim Röther, Jan Hendrik Schäfer, Peter D. Schellinger, Eberhard Siebert, Florian Stögbauer, Steffen Tiedt, Christoph Trumm, Timo Uphaus, Silke Wunderlich, Sarah Zweynert

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineModified Rankin ScaleStroke (engine)Internal medicineRandomized controlled trialCohortMyocardial infarctionClinical trialCardiologySurgeryIschemic strokeIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke with large infarct. Patients older than 80 years with large infarct are commonly encountered in clinical practice but underrepresented in randomized clinical trials. Objective: To provide an age-based analysis of functional outcomes in endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic strokes with large infarct. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective multicenter cohort study included patients from the German Stroke Registry who received endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke with large infarct at 1 of 25 German stroke centers between May 2015 and December 2021. Patients with acute ischemic stroke due to anterior circulation large vessel occlusion and large infarct were included. Large infarct was defined as an Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score of 0 to 5. Patients were subdivided by age to evaluate its association with functional outcomes. Exposure: Age. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were independent ambulation (90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 0-3) and mortality (90-day modified Rankin Scale score of 6). Results: A total of 408 patients with large infarct were included (217 women [53.2%]; median [IQR] age, 75 [64-83] years). The rate of independent ambulation decreased from 56.4% in patients aged 60 years and younger (44 of 78 patients) to 15.1% in patients older than 80 years (19 of 126 patients) (P < .001), while mortality increased from 15.4% (12 patients) to 64.3% (81 patients) (P < .001). Being older than 80 years was associated with lower rates of independent ambulation (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82; P = .01) and higher mortality (aOR, 2.75; 95% CI, 1.61-4.72; P < .001). A final modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction grade of 2b or 3 was associated with higher rates of independent ambulation (aOR, 4.95; 95% CI, 2.14-11.43; P < .001), independent of age and without significant interaction (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.35-1.34; P = .27). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of patients with acute ischemic stroke and large infarct, age was associated with functional outcomes. Patients older than 80 years had poor prognosis with high mortality but with sizeable differences depending on additional baseline and treatment characteristics. While it does not seem justified to apply a fixed upper age limit for endovascular thrombectomy, these results could assist clinicians in making informed treatment decisions in older patients with large ischemic stroke.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations46
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207