ArticleStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2024
Functional Outcomes and Symptomatic Intracranial Hemorrhage After Endovascular Treatment in Acute Vertebrobasilar Artery Occlusions: External Validation of Prediction Models.
Article in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Vertebrobasilar artery occlusion (VBAO) is a severe type of stroke. Multiple prediction models for outcome and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) of patients with acute ischemic stroke treated with endovascular treatment have been developed to improve patient management, but few are based on VBAO. This study aimed to provide an overview of published models to predict functional outcome and sICH as well as to validate their ability in patients with acute VBAO treated with endovascular treatment. Methods: We performed a systematic search to identify models either developed or validated to predict functional outcomes or sICH after endovascular treatment. Models were externally validated in the Posterior Circulation Ischemic Stroke Registry (PERSIST) study (n = 2422). Outcome measures included the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score at 90 days and sICH. Model performance was evaluated with discrimination (c-statistic) and calibration (slope and intercept). Results: A total of 65 models were included in overview. The most frequently used predictors were baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score (n = 57), age (n = 45), and glucose (n = 32). In the external validation cohort, 777 of 2353 patients (33.0%) achieved mRS score 0-2 at 90 days, 1061 of 2353 patients (45.1%) patients achieved mRS score 0-3 at 90 days, and sICH occurred in 170 of 2422 patients (7.0%). Finally, 27 models were included in external validation. For functional outcome models focusing on mRS score 0-2/3-6, discrimination ranged from 0.63 to 0.66 and best calibrated model was SC (Stroke Checkerboard) (intercept, -0.13 [95% CI, -0.27 to 0.01]; slope, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.67-1.17]). For functional outcome models focusing on mRS score 0-3/4-6, discrimination ranged from 0.64 to 0.74 and best calibrated model was modified Houston Intra-Arterial Therapy 2 (mHIAT2) (intercept, -0.12 [95% CI, -0.31 to 0.07]; slope, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.65-1.04]). For sICH models, discrimination ranged from 0.53 to 0.83 and best calibrated model was Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT Score, and glucose (TAG) (intercept, 0.13 [95% CI, -0.25 to 0.51]; slope, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.63-1.23]). Conclusions: The currently published models are inadequate for predicting functional outcomes and sICH in patients with acute VBAO undergoing endovascular treatment and, therefore, there is a need for more effective models specifically developed for VBAO conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.