NEUROCOGNITIVE FUNCTIONS IN PATIENTS WITH CAROTID STENOSIS MESURED IN DISTANT PERIOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aims:Introduction. The number of surgical interventions on the brachiocephalic arteries is increased progressively every year, whereas carotid endarterectomy is rated the second in most frequent operations in cardiovascular surgeryObjectives: To study the incidence of cognitive dysfunction in the long-term in patients with carotid stenosis who underwent carotid endarterectomy and who received only conservative treatment, evaluated with neurocognitive testingMethods:The study included 80 patients (the main group) operated for hemodynamically significant atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid arteries(ICA), as well as 20 patients with a similar lesion who refused surgical treatment(control group). To detect cognitive dysfunction, all patients underwent complex cognitive testing using a battery of 3 tests:the Mini-Mental State Examination(MMSE), the Frontal Assessment Battery(FAB) of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale(MoCA). Testing in the main group was performed a day before the surgical intervention, and in the delayed(after 3 and 6 months) postoperative periods. In the control group, patients were tested at the time of enrollment, at 3 and 6 months of follow-upResults:Prior to the operation cognitive tests of both groups patients were within normal limits. Patients operated on the ICA had lower levels of cognitive impairment after 3 months of follow-up than patients receiving only conservative treatment. Analysis of delayed test results showed lower values in the control group for the all scales after 6 months(MMSE 28.9u00b13.,p=0.01,FAB 15.3u00b13.8,p=0.03,MoCA 28.4u00b13.4 p=0.01 in the group of operated patients and 26.9u00b11.3 ,p=0.01, 13.3u00b13.8,p=0.03,26.3u00b13.2 in the control group respectively)Conclusions:ICA stenosis surgical treatment may benefit the patientsu2019 neurocognitive functions in the distant period.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.044 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".