Endovascular Stroke Thrombectomy for Patients With Large Ischemic Core
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Recently, 6 randomized clinical trials-RESCUE-Japan-LIMIT (Recovery by Endovascular Salvage for Cerebral Ultra-Acute Embolism-Japan Large Ischemic Core Trial), ANGEL-ASPECT (Trial of Endovascular Therapy for Acute Ischemic Stroke With Large Infarct), SELECT2 (Trial of Endovascular Thrombectomy for Large Ischemic Strokes), TESLA (Thrombectomy for Emergent Salvage of Large Anterior Circulation Ischemic Stroke), TENSION (Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke With Established Large Infarct), and LASTE (Large Stroke Therapy Evaluation)-have concluded their investigations on the efficacy and safety of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) for the treatment of patients with ischemic stroke, anterior-circulation large vessel occlusions, and large areas of ischemic changes defined as an Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score (ASPECTS) of 5 or less. Overall, the results appeared to be positive, with 5 of the 6 trials meeting their primary efficacy end point, and 1 trial that was a near miss. However, questions remain regarding how these trial results should be interpreted and incorporated into routine clinical practice. Observations: In this narrative review and analysis of published trials, important nuances of the available clinical data were identified, and important areas of lingering uncertainty were highlighted, including the efficacy and safety of EVT for patients with a low ASPECTS score in late treatment windows and those with large core volumes. Also emphasized was the possibly important role of advanced neuroimaging modalities such as perfusion and magnetic resonance imaging when making EVT treatment decisions for select patients with low ASPECTS scores. Conclusions and Relevance: Recent trial data provide strong evidence that EVT is safe and effective for patients with anterior, large vessel-occlusion stroke and low ASPECTS scores who present within 6 hours from stroke onset. However, patient outcomes often remain poor despite EVT treatment. The efficacy and safety of EVT for patients with low ASPECTS scores who present beyond 6 hours of stroke onset remain uncertain, and the current trial data seem too scarce to justify forgoing advanced stroke imaging during this extended time window. Furthermore, the efficacy and safety of EVT for patients with large core volumes (100 mL or greater) or M2 occlusions (ie, occlusions of the second segment of the middle cerebral artery) remain uncertain. Future research to better identify patients likely to meaningfully respond to EVT is needed to further optimize the stroke triage process and health care resource utilization.
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 | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".