Unruptured Cerebral Aneurysms Presenting with Ischemic Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients harboring an unruptured cerebral aneurysm may present with ischemic events. The goal of this study is to assess the clinical and radiological characteristics and the outcome following treatment of these patients. METHODS: The study population included 463 patients with unruptured cerebral aneurysms treated between January 2000 and November 2006. Patients with aneurysms manifesting with ischemic events were included. Outcome was assessed 12 months following aneurysm treatment using the modified Rankin scale. RESULTS: Eleven patients were included in this series. An acute ischemic lesion in the symptomatic territory was demonstrated in six patients. The aneurysms were located on the internal carotid artery (n=4), middle cerebral artery (n=4), superior cerebellar artery (n=2) and basilar artery (n=1). They measured 10 mm or less (n=7); 11-20 mm (n=2); more than 21 mm (n=2). Five aneurysms were partially thrombosed on imaging. Five patients were referred for coiling. Of these, one patient had an unsuccessful coiling attempt, one had a residual neck, and three presented an aneurysm recurrence. Six patients were treated surgically. Symptomatic thromboembolism occurred after surgery in three patients. Complete aneurysm exclusion was documented in five of six operated patients. Nine of the ten treated patients had a favorable outcome. CONCLUSION: Even though aneurysms presenting with ischemic events are often small and located on the anterior circulation, in this series the risk of thromboembolic events following aneurysm treatment is noteworthy. This information is relevant given the possible benign natural history in terms of stroke and risk of bleeding for some of these aneurysms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".