Effect of the Cervical Lesion Severity on Procedural and Clinical Outcomes after Endovascular Treatment of Acute Tandem Lesions: A Multicenter Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tandem lesions pose unique challenges in the endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke. We aimed to compare the clinical and procedural outcomes of patients with tandem lesions and extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) complete occlusion versus those with moderate to severe stenosis. METHODS This is a subanalysis of a multicenter cohort of patients with acute anterior circulation tandem lesions treated with intracranial mechanical thrombectomy and carotid artery stenting, between January 2015 and December 2020. The patients were categorized into 2 groups: extracranial ICA stenosis >70% to 99% and complete occlusion. Outcomes included successful and excellent recanalization, functional independence, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and puncture‐to‐recanalization time. Sensitivity analyses were conducted based on varying degrees of stenosis, and we explored interactions with age, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT [Computed Tomography] Score, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, procedural antiplatelets, ICA treatment approach, ICA lesion etiology, Intravenous thrombolysis, and use of a balloon‐guide catheter. RESULTS The study included 323 patients; 166 (51.4%) of whom presented with ICA occlusion and 157 (48.6%) with severe stenosis. Patients with ICA occlusion had significantly higher rates of previous stroke/transient ischemic attack, and antegrade ICA treatment approach. The comparison between both groups in univariable and multivariable analysis revealed no significant differences in the rates of successful and excellent recanalization, functional independence, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, and additional outcomes. The median puncture‐to‐recanalization time was longer in the occlusion group (adjusted coefficient, 1.21 [95% CI 1.01–1.46], P = 0.05). When categorized into 3 groups (occlusion, severe, and moderate stenosis), median puncture‐to‐recanalization time was significantly higher in patients with occlusion (adjusted coefficient, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.04–1.71], P = 0.022), and a trend toward statistical significance was observed in patients with severe stenosis (adjusted coefficient, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.98–1.71], P = 0.068), compared with patients with moderate stenosis. Interaction analysis did not yield significant differences. CONCLUSION In patients with tandem lesions, those with ICA occlusion presented longer puncture‐to‐recanalization time than patients with cervical stenosis. This observation might be linked to higher rates of an antegrade approach in patients with ICA occlusion.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".