Intraoperative Arterial Blood Flow and Stump Pressure Measurements in Internal Carotid Artery Near‐Occlusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Near‐occlusion (NO) with and without full collapse seems to cause low blood flow in symptomatic carotid stenosis. If the stroke mechanism is hypoperfusion in NO, the stump pressure should be low. The aim was to compare and describe stump pressure and blood flow in conventional ≥ 50% stenosis, NO without full collapse, and NO with full collapse. In this prospective single‐center study, consecutive patients with symptomatic ≥ 50% carotid stenosis (NASCET grading), undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) were recruited. NO was diagnosed by three blinded observers who reviewed computed tomography angiographies (CTA). Intraoperative measurements of ICA flow before and after CEA and stump pressure were recorded. One hundred and eighty‐one patients were included; 116 (64%) had conventional ≥ 50% stenosis, and 66 (36%) had NO. Before CEA, the median ICA flow was significantly lower in NO (90 ml/min) compared to conventional ≥ 50% stenosis (170 mL/min, p < 0.001). In contrast, no difference was observed after CEA (NO 170 mL/min, conventional ≥ 50% stenosis 180 mL/min, p = 0.48). The ICA flow change was significantly higher in NO compared to conventional stenosis ( p < 0.001). There was a significant correlation between the distal ICA diameter on CTA and the ICA flow before CEA ( r = 0.579, p < 0.001). There were no differences in stump pressure between NO and conventional ≥ 50% stenoses (median 53 (range 41–66) mmHg and median 54 (range 40–67) mmHg, respectively, p = 0.93), nor any correlation between the stump pressure and the distal ICA diameter ( r = 0.063, p = 0.41). NO causes low ICA flow, and to our knowledge, this is the first time this causal link between ICA flow and NO is clearly established. Since patients with NO did not have low stump pressure, the mechanism of stroke in NO does not seem to be hypoperfusion.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".