A Randomized Trial of Intraarterial Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke
2015 · paper · Clinical trials
A randomized trial of 500 Dutch patients with acute ischemic stroke from a proximal artery blockage, comparing intraarterial treatment plus usual care with usual care alone. Functional independence at 90 days was 32.6% versus 19.1%, without significant differences in mortality or hemorrhage.
1 finding
Reference or label 'stents showed reperfusion rates of 61% and 86%, but these rates were based on end points of a modified TICI score of 2a to 3 and a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia score of 2 or 3, respectively.27,28' — the rate/end-point pairing appears reversed, and TIMI is expanded as 'Myocardial Ischemia'.
- p. 8 Discussion, second limitation
stents showed reperfusion rates of 61% and 86%, but these rates were based on end points
- p. 9 Discussion, top of left column
of a modified TICI score of 2a to 3 and a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia score of 2 or 3, respectively.27,28
- p. 10 References 27 and 28
Trevo versus Merci retrievers for thrombectomy revascularisation
- p. 9 Discussion, limitations (top of page)
bolysis in Myocardial Ischemia score of 2 or 3
Only the authors can say what is right here.
Judge's note: Rests on outside knowledge: TREVO 2 (ref 27) reported 86% with TICI ≥2, and SWIFT (ref 28) reported 61% with TIMI 2–3; TIMI stands for Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction. The page 8 and 9 images confirm the printed wording, and the p10 reference list confirms that ref 27 is TREVO 2 and ref 28 is SWIFT. Under 'respectively', the printed text pairs 61% with TICI and 86% with TIMI, the opposite of the cited trials. Only the authors can confirm the intended pairing.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
5 minor (typos and the like; most checked by the judge only)
Wording Methods define 'Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage', but the Abstract and Table 3 label the outcome 'Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage', and the Table 3 'Any type' total under that heading (18 vs 17) includes 'Subarachnoid hemorrhage' (2 vs 0).
- p. 3 Methods, Outcome and Safety Measures
Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was defined as neurologic deterioration
- p. 8 Table 3, serious adverse events
Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
- p. 8 Table 3, row under symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
Subarachnoid hemorrhage
- p. 1 Abstract, Results
the occurrence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage
Judge's note: Page 3 image: the Methods define symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage. Page 8 Table 3: the heading reads 'Symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage', and the subarachnoid row is counted in the Any type total (0+14+1+1+2=18; 2+14+0+1+0=17). The Abstract (p1) also says 'intracerebral'. The two terms are often used loosely, and the meaning can still be recovered, so this is a minor labelling inconsistency.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
Wording Methods say 'Follow-up CT scans obtained at 5 days were assessed for the presence of intracranial hemorrhage', while the same paragraph group gives follow-up noncontrast CT 'at 5 to 7 days' and the Table 2 footnote says it was 'performed at 3 to 9 days'.
- p. 3
Follow- up CT scans obtained at 5 days were assessed for
Judge's note: The page 3 image shows 'at 5 days', and the imaging outcomes sentence on the same page says 'at 5 to 7 days'. The Table 2 footnote †† (p6) says 3 to 9 days. 'At 5 days' is probably shorthand for the same scan, so this is a minor imprecision in wording.
Second check: another model agreed
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Table 1 footnote ¶: 'Scores ranges from 0 to 10' should read 'Scores range from 0 to 10'.
- p. 5 Table 1, footnote ¶
Scores ranges from 0 to 10
Judge's note: The wording is visible in the page 5 footnote image. It is a subject–verb agreement error.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Table 2 footnote ¶: 'Scores ranges from 0 to 20' should read 'Scores range from 0 to 20'.
- p. 6 Table 2, footnote ¶
Scores ranges from 0 to 20
Judge's note: The wording is visible in the page 6 footnote image. The next footnote reads 'Scores range'.
Second check: none (judge only)
Report a problem with this finding
Typo Reference 3 prints 'Beumer D, Saiedie G, Fonvile S, et al.'; the surname is likely 'Fonville'.
- p. 10 Reference 3
Beumer D, Saiedie G, Fonvile S, et al.
Only the authors can say what is right here.
Judge's note: Rests on outside knowledge: the co-author's surname is spelled Fonville. The page 10 image shows 'Fonvile' as quoted.
Second check: none (judge only)