Leveraging a randomized trial to assess relationships between transeptal puncture, brain emboli, and migraine symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation procedures with transseptal punctures (usually for atrial fibrillation) are often associated with migraine-related visual auras, but the mechanism remains unknown. Whether this phenomenon is mediated by the creation of an atrial septal defect from transseptal puncture or by silent acute brain emboli detected on magnetic resonance imaging related to the procedure remains to be investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether randomization to a transseptal puncture during catheter ablation for ventricular arrhythmias is associated with postprocedural visual auras and assess the relationship between occipital and parietal lobes acute brain emboli and migraine-related visual auras. METHODS: In the Transseptal Versus Retrograde Aortic Ventricular Entry to Reduce Systemic Emboli trial, patients undergoing catheter ablation for ventricular arrhythmias were randomized to ventricular access via transseptal puncture vs a retrograde aortic approach. All had brain magnetic resonance imaging the day after their procedure and underwent a validated migraine assessment at 1 month. RESULTS: No differences in postablation visual auras were observed between transseptal (16% of 63) and retrograde aortic approaches (14% of 57; P = .78). However, more participants with acute brain emboli in the occipital or parietal lobes experienced migraine-related visual auras (38% vs 11%; P < .01). After multivariable adjustment, the presence of acute brain emboli was associated with 12-fold greater odds of visual auras. CONCLUSION: Transseptal puncture was not associated with visual auras; however, acute brain emboli involving the visual cortex were associated with such symptoms. These data suggest that transseptal puncture is not causal in migraine-related visual auras and that postprocedure acute brain emboli are apparently not always clinically silent.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".