Spinal dural arteriovenous fistula: correlation between radiological and clinical findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The pathophysiology of spinal dural arteriovenous fistulas (SDAVFs) results in perimedullary venous congestion and in turn central cord congestion. Clinically, this presents with progressive neurological dysfunctions that, if diagnosed in a timely fashion, can be at least halted and in part reversed. In SDAVFs, imaging features on MRI and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) have not been studied in conjunction with clinical findings. The primary purpose of the present study was to test if severity of clinical presentation varies in relation to imaging. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study identified 12 patients treated for SDAVF at the authors' institution. The extent of venous congestion and cord edema was quantified by the number of vertebral levels shown to be affected on DSA and MRI. A modified Aminoff-Logue Scale (ALS) score was assigned at the time of diagnosis and again after definitive therapy. The patients were divided into one of two groups: those with venous congestion < 7 and ≥ 7 vertebral levels seen on DSA and MRI and with central cord edema < 6 and ≥ 6 levels. A t-test was used to assess for a difference in the presenting ALS score between the groups. RESULTS: Patients with ≥ 7 levels of venous congestion reported greater functional disability (DSA: p ≤ 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.509; and MRI: p ≤ 0.001, d = 0.632). Patients with a greater extent of cord edema also reported worse functional disability (p ≤ 0.001, d = 2.31). There was a strong linear correlation between the post- and pretreatment ALS scores (R(2) = 0.86) for those with successful interventions (n = 9). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an SDAVF, the severity of the neurological dysfunction may be predicted by the extent of DSA- and MRI-documented venous congestion and cord edema. There was a strong positive relationship between initial and posttreatment neurological dysfunction.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".