MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413051445 · doi:10.1177/15910199251365529

Outcomes after carotid revascularization for symptomatic carotid artery web: A multi-institutional cohort study

2025· article· en· W4413051445 on OpenAlexaff
Michael T. Bounajem, Allison Liang, Annie Trang, Bachar El Baba, T Bielinski, Karl L. Sangwon, Yuchong Zhang, Daniel D. Wiggan, Eric A. Grin, Avi A. Gajjar, Christopher R. Pasarikovski, Victor X. D. Yang, Ronit Agid, Michael R. Levitt, Matthew N. Anderson, R. Michael Meyer, Jacob Cherian, Brian M. Howard, Philipp Hendrix, Isaac Josh Abecassis, Visish M. Srinivasan, M. Reid Gooch, Erez Nossek, Ramesh Grandhi

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventional Neuroradiology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern UniversityUniversity Health NetworkQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarotid arteriesRevascularizationCohortInternal medicineCardiologyStroke (engine)Myocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ObjectiveCarotid web can serve as a nidus for clot formation and subsequent thromboembolic stroke. Although treatment historically involved antiplatelet therapy, recent evidence demonstrates notably elevated recurrent stroke rates despite best medical therapy. We examined the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS), which involves placing a coil in the artery, and carotid endarterectomy (CEA), a surgery to remove the clot, for treatment of symptomatic carotid web.MethodsA multi-institutional retrospective registry including adult patients with carotid web with history of ipsilateral acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) treated with either carotid artery stenting or endarterectomy was reviewed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, clinical presentation, treatment methodology, and outcomes at follow up were collected.ResultsAmong the 71 included patients (mean age 52.4 years, 44 (62.4%) female), 23 (32.4%) underwent CEA, and 48 (67.6%) underwent CAS. The most common presenting symptoms were hemibody numbness/weakness, aphasia, and gaze deviation. On average, patients had experienced 1.12 ± 0.7 strokes or TIAs before intervention, with a mean delay of 115 ± 224 days between initial stroke/TIA and intervention. The median preintervention modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score was 2. Perioperatively, one patient (1.41%) experienced stroke and none experienced myocardial infarction. During mean 14.8 (±29.2)-month follow up, one patient experienced asymptomatic recurrent stroke (1.41%). Median mRS at follow up was 1, and carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy demonstrated similar rates of postoperative complication and recurrent stroke rates.ConclusionOur results suggest that endarterectomy and stenting are safe and efficacious for minimizing subsequent stroke risk in patients who have experienced stroke or TIA from carotid webbing, warranting further studies to determine the optimal timing and method of treatment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterventional NeuroradiologySame topicRenal and Vascular PathologiesFrench-language works237,207