Clinical and Angiographic Follow-up of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms Treated with Endovascular Embolization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Endovascular embolization is a well-established treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, but concern about its long-term stability and its ability to prevent rehemorrhage are still present. We evaluated the long-term clinical and angiographic follow-up of patients with ruptured cerebral aneurysms treated with coiling, focusing on rehemorrhage and changes in aneurysm morphologic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 377 patients with ruptured aneurysms that were treated with endovascular approaches at our institution between 1994 and 2008 were reviewed. Clinical and angiographic data were analyzed from a prospectively collected data base. RESULTS: There were 377 patients with 391 ruptured aneurysms treated for 14 years. Good outcome (Glasgow Outcome Score [GOS], 5) was achieved in 74% of patients, moderate disability or poor outcome in 18%, and 8.8% died. Permanent morbidity or mortality from procedural complications occurred in 2.9%. Complete follow-up was available for 85% of surviving patients, with mean follow-up of 22.3 months. Re-treatment was required in 11% (31 patients). Eight (2.1%) patients had rebleeding, 6 (1.6%) in the hospital within 30 days of treatment, 5 in the first 48 hours. Follow-up imaging was available in 276 aneurysms in 270 patients. Recanalization occurred in 56 of 276 aneurysms (20.3%) regardless of the initial angiographic result, but the risk was higher if a body remnant was left (chi2, 11.791; P = .0006). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term clinical and angiographic follow-up demonstrates the efficacy of endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms. Rebleeding after treatment is rare, with the greatest risk during the first 48 hours after treatment. Initial angiographic results are not a useful predictor of clinical outcome or rehemorrhage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".