Immediate Anatomic Results after the Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: Analysis in the CLARITY Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The efficacy of the endovascular treatment in providing stable occlusion of intracranial aneurysms is still controversial and should be precisely analyzed. A first step is to carefully study immediate anatomical results. CLARITY (Clinical and Anatomical Results in the Treatment of Ruptured Intracranial Aneurysms) is a prospective multicenter consecutive series including patients treated by coiling for ruptured aneurysms. Immediate anatomic results are presented. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Postoperative anatomic results were evaluated by DSA by the treating physician and anonymously and independently by 2 experienced neuroradiologists by using the 3-point Montreal Scale. Patients were divided into 2 groups: patients treated with GDC and those treated with Matrix detachable coils. RESULTS: A total of 773 patients (461 women, 312 men; 19-80 years of age; mean, 51.2 +/- 13.2 years) with 773 ruptured aneurysms were included in the study. The rate of occlusion as determined by the treating physician was designated complete for 586 aneurysms (75.8%), neck remnant for 145 aneurysms (18.8%), and aneurysm remnant for 42 aneurysms (5.4%). The same evaluation as reported by the 2 independent reviewers was complete occlusion for 366 aneurysms (47.4%), neck remnant for 324 aneurysms (41.9%), and aneurysm remnant for 83 aneurysms (10.7%). Postoperative anatomic results were significantly linked to age but not to the technique of endovascular treatment or aneurysm characteristics (location, size, dome-to neck ratio). Results were not significantly different between the GDC and Matrix group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms resulted in a high rate of satisfactory occlusion (complete occlusion and neck remnant in 89.3%). Patient age was the only factor associated with the rate of occlusion. The rate of aneurysm occlusion differed insignificantly between GDC and Matrix coils.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".