Development and internal validation of a parsimonious model for neurological deterioration at 48 h after endovascular thrombectomy
Related Experiment Videos
Guoyong Ren1, Chenyang Zhao1, Yaxuan Sun1
1Department of Neurology, Shanxi Provincial People's Hospital, Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China.
Background:
The incremental value of routine admission measurements for predicting early neurological deterioration after endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) remains unclear.
Methods:
This retrospective single-center reanalysis used a 2020-2022 registry. END48 was defined as an increase of at least 4 National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) points from admission to the fixed 48-h postoperative assessment. The conservative primary cohort excluded an unresolved longitudinal data segment. A revision-stage locked five-predictor logistic regression model included admission NIHSS scores, age, glucose levels, white blood cell count, and ln triglyceride value, with the NIHSS-only model serving as the comparator. Internal validation used 1,000 bootstrap samples and paired nested intervals of 1,000 outer × 100 inner samples.
Results:
Of the 253 records representing 251 unique patients, 214 adults entered the primary cohort; 51 (23.8%) had END48. The primary model had an apparent area under the curve (AUC) of 0.651 and an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.601 (0.511 to 0.723). The corrected AUC difference vs. the NIHSS-only model was 0.038 (-0.025 to 0.171). The corrected Brier score was 0.180, compared to a prevalence-only reference of 0.182, resulting in a Brier skill score of 0.9%. The corrected primary calibration slope was 0.731 (0.519 to 0.892). Incremental net benefit was -0.015, 0.036, and 0.013 at 10%, 20%, and 30% thresholds, respectively; all corresponding 95% confidence intervals crossed zero. Post-hoc Riley assessments across plausible model-fit assumptions indicated that the available cohort was below the sample size desirable for model development. The reconstructed cohort sensitivity analysis did not change the overall interpretation.
Conclusion:
Discrimination was limited, improvement in probability accuracy was marginal, and incremental discrimination and net benefit were uncertain. The model should be regarded as exploratory rather than clinically implementable; independent validation and improved outcome ascertainment are required.