The impact of therapeutic modality on outcomes following repair of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: an administrative data analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Enrolling a selected sample of ruptured intracranial aneurysms, the International Subarachnoid Aneurysm Trial (ISAT) found endovascular coiling to be superior to microsurgical clipping. The performance of coiling in a more general population of ruptured aneurysms has not been adequately studied. METHODS: Using provincial administrative data from Ontario, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) who underwent aneurysm repair. The exposure was defined as endovascular versus surgical aneurysm repair. The prespecified primary outcome was time to death or readmission for SAH. Data from the entire cohort were analyzed using a multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. Propensity scores were used to compare a matched subgroup of patients with aneurysms who had similar baseline characteristics. The potential impact of unmeasured confounding was assessed using sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2004, 2342 aneurysms were clipped and 778 were coiled in Ontario. The proportion of aneurysms treated by coiling increased steadily over time. In the adjusted analysis of the entire cohort, endovascular coiling was associated with a significantly increased hazard of death or SAH readmission (hazard ratio 1.25 [95% CI 1.00–1.55], p = 0.04). Similar results were obtained from the propensity score matched analysis (hazard ratio 1.25 [95% CI 1.04–1.50], p = 0.02). Measures of procedural morbidity and mortality were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the current analysis call into question the generalizability of the ISAT to all ruptured aneurysms. Given the limitations inherent in this form of analysis, further clinical studies—rigorously assessing the performance of endovascular therapy in patients with non-ISAT-like aneurysms—are indicated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".