Edaravone plus compound cerebroside in elderly patients with carotid plaque cerebral infarction: Efficacy and prognosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy, long-term prognosis and recovery of cognitive function of the elderly patients with carotid plaque massive cerebral infarction (CPMCI) who did not receive reperfusion therapy. METHODS: A multi-center, retrospective, single-arm design was adopted in this study, and 184 elderly patients with CPMCI who received the combined treatment of Edaravone, dextromethorphan and compound cerebroside from January 2021 to December 2023 were included. Main outcome measures include modified Rankin scale (mRS) score and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score. Secondary outcome measures included Barthel index, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) score, recurrent stroke rate, survival rate and complications. The follow-up time was 1 year. RESULTS: After 6 months of treatment, 54.9 % patients achieved functional independence (mRS≤2), defined as a Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score of ≤ 2. The NIHSS score significantly decreased from a mean of 16.52 ± 4.23 at baseline to 5.78 ± 3.19 at six months (P < 0.001). Additionally, both the Barthel Index and MoCA scores showed significant improvements (P < 0.001). The one-year recurrent stroke rate was 13.59 %, while the one-year survival rate was 77.7 %. Treatment-related complications were primarily mild to moderate, including aspiration pneumonia (10.87 %) and urinary tract infections (5.97 %), resulting in a total incidence of 16.85 %. CONCLUSION: Edaravone, dextran and compound cerebroside combination therapy has a significant clinical effect on elderly CPMCI patients without reperfusion therapy, which can improve their functional independence, neurological function, activities of daily living and cognitive function, with acceptable safety.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".