MRI vs CT for Baseline Imaging Evaluation in Acute Large Artery Ischemic Stroke.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Whether MRI or CT is preferable for the evaluation of patients with suspected stroke remains a matter of debate, given that the imaging modality acquired at baseline may be a relevant determinant of workflow delays and outcomes with it, in patients with stroke undergoing acute reperfusion therapies. METHODS In this post hoc analysis of the SWIFT-DIRECT trial that investigated noninferiority of thrombectomy alone vs IV thrombolysis (IVT) + thrombectomy in patients with an acute ischemic anterior circulation large vessel occlusive stroke eligible to receive IVT within 4.5 hours after last seen well, we tested for a potential interaction between baseline imaging modality (MRI/MR-angiography [MRA] vs CT/CT-angiography [CTA]) and the effect of acute treatment (thrombectomy vs IVT + thrombectomy) on clinical and safety outcomes and procedural metrics (primary analysis). Moreover, we examined the association between baseline imaging modality and these outcomes using regression models adjusted for age, sex, baseline NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS), occlusion location, and Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score (ASPECTS) (secondary analysis). Endpoints included workflow times, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score at 90 days, the rate of successful reperfusion, the odds for early neurologic deterioration within 24 hours, and the risk of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. The imaging modality acquired was chosen at the discretion of the treating physicians and commonly reflects center-specific standard procedures. RESULTS Four hundred five of 408 patients enrolled in the SWIFT-DIRECT trial were included in this substudy. Two hundred (49.4%) patients underwent MRI/MRA, and 205 (50.6%) underwent CT/CTA. Patients with MRI/MRA had lower NIHSS scores (16 [interquartile range (IQR) 12-20] vs 18 [IQR 14-20], p = 0.012) and lower ASPECTS (8 [IQR 6-9] vs 8 [IQR 7-9], p = 0.021) compared with those with CT/CTA. In terms of the primary analysis, we found no evidence for an interaction between baseline imaging modality and the effect of IVT + thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone. Regarding the secondary analysis, MRI/MRA acquisition was associated with workflow delays of approximately 20 minutes, higher odds of functional independence at 90 days (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.65, 95% CI 1.07-2.56), and similar mortality rates (aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.36-1.47) compared with CT/CTA. DISCUSSION This post hoc analysis does not suggest treatment effect heterogeneity of IVT + thrombectomy vs thrombectomy alone in large artery stroke patients with different imaging modalities. There was no evidence that functional outcome at 90 days was less favorable following MRI/MRA at baseline compared with CT/CTA, despite significant workflow delays. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03192332.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".