MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416921575 · doi:10.1161/svi270000_415

Abstract 415: Pre‐Treatment Hemorrhagic Infarct Is Associated with Worse Outcome After Mechanical Thrombectomy: A Multicenter Bayesian Analysis

2025· article· en· W4416921575 on OpenAlexaff
Thiago Oscar Goulart, Markus D. Schirmer, A. K. Bonkhoff, E. L. Bogdanoff, P. Krieger, Brent Teasdale, A. S. Das, Adam A. Dmytriw, James D. Rabinov, Christopher J. Stapleton, Ankit Patel, Valeria Tutino, Michael Nahhas, Sunil A. Sheth, Claus Z. Simonsen, Robert W. Regenhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke Vascular and Interventional Neurology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntracerebral hemorrhageOdds ratioLogistic regressionConfidence intervalHematomaStroke (engine)ThrombolysisOcclusion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction/Purpose Hemorrhagic infarction (HI), defined as petechial bleeding within infarcted tissue, is often considered benign. However, its clinical significance before mechanical thrombectomy (MT) remains unclear. We sought to evaluate whether HI detected on sensitive pre‐treatment MRI is associated with 90‐day functional dependence, post‐MT parenchymal hematoma (PH), and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (SICH). Materials/Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter, multinational study of consecutive patients with anterior circulation large vessel occlusion who underwent MT and had pre‐treatment T2*‐weighted MRI. HI was classified as type I or II according to ECASS III criteria, blinded to other data. Outcomes included functional dependence or death at 90 days (modified Rankin scale, mRS 3‐6), ipsilateral PH, and SICH during the acute hospitalization according to ECASS III. Multivariable Bayesian [reporting posterior odds ratios (OR), 95% credible intervals (CrI), and posterior probability that OR>1]and frequentist logistic regression models [reporting adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and p‐values] were used to assess associations, adjusting for clinical and procedural covariates. Results Among 479 patients, the median age was 72 years (IQR: 59‐80), 46% were female, 50% received intravenous thrombolysis, and 83% achieved mTICI 2b‐3 successful reperfusion. Pre‐treatment HI was present in 5.2% (Type I: 2.7%, II: 2.5%). Functional dependence or death at 90 days was observed in 52%, PH in 9.4%, and SICH in 3.1%. Accounting for age, sex, baseline mRS, vascular risk factors, NIHSS, intravenous thrombolysis, infarct volume, time from onset, and successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b‐3), pre‐treatment HI was independently associated with functional dependence or death (Bayesian OR=6.66, 95%CrI=2.15‐24.28, Pr[OR>1]=1.00; frequentist aOR=5.95, 95%CI=1.91‐18.52, p=0.002, Table ). Pre‐MT HI was also independently associated with the development of ipsilateral PH (Bayesian OR=2.76, 95%CrI=0.73‐9.26, Pr[OR>1]=0.94; frequentist aOR=2.84, 95%CI=0.84‐9.58, p=0.091) and SICH (Bayesian OR=5.59, 95%CrI=0.63‐34.92, Pr[OR>1]=0.95; frequentist aOR=6.02, 95%CI=1.00‐36.11, p=0.049). Results were consistent across other sensitivity analyses using Hüber‐White standard errors and Firth regression. Conclusion HI on pre‐treatment MRI is associated with worse long‐term functional outcomes and increased risk of more significant hemorrhagic transformation after thrombectomy. While not a contraindication to MT, HI may serve as a prognostic marker of reperfusion vulnerability and warrants further study as a potential target for neuroprotective strategies to prevent reperfusion injury. image

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStroke Vascular and Interventional NeurologySame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207