Thrombophilic factors and the formation of dural arteriovenous fistulas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Dural arteriovenous fistulas (DAVFs) are distinct neurovascular entities. Although their exact origins are unknown, venous thrombosis and venous hypertension are likely to be major inducing factors. To address the relationship between DAVFs and thrombophilic factors, the authors conducted a case-control study at a single institution and performed a metaanalysis of the literature. METHODS: Forty patients with DAVFs at Toronto Western Hospital were recruited to complete a questionnaire and to donate blood samples for factor V Leiden mutation and factor II G20210A mutation screening and assessment of coagulation factors. The questionnaire was designed to collect information on each participant's specific history of venous thrombosis, medications, and race. A control group of 33 healthy volunteers agreed to the same protocol. A MEDLINE search of the literature from 1966 to the present was conducted and three relevant series were found. The results of the present study were pooled with the data from the literature. RESULTS: Combining institutional results with the results from the literature yielded a total of 121 patients and 178 control group members. Thrombophilic mutations were present in 16 patients and four healthy volunteers, with an odds ratio (OR) of 4.69 for factor V Leiden (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.24-17.69) and an OR of 10.87 for the prothrombin G20210A allele (95% CI 1.32-89.51). Levels of the basic coagulation profile, fibrinogen, and factor VIII were within normal limits. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with the factor V Leiden and factor II G20210A mutations are at a higher risk for DAVFs. However, because these mutations are not implicated in the vast majority of DAVFs, routine screening is not recommended.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".