Cerecyte Coil Trial: Procedural Safety and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ruptured and Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: This study arose from a need to systematically evaluate the clinical and angiographic outcomes of intracranial aneurysms treated with modified coils. We report the procedural safety and clinical outcomes in a prospective randomized controlled trial of endovascular coiling for ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms, comparing polymer-loaded Cerecyte coils with bare platinum coils in 23 centers worldwide. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five hundred patients between 18 and 70 years of age with a ruptured or unruptured target aneurysm planning to undergo endovascular coiling were randomized to receive Cerecyte or bare platinum coils. Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-nine patients were allocated to Cerecyte coils and 251 to bare platinum coils. Baseline characteristics were balanced. For ruptured aneurysms, in-hospital mortality was 2/114 (1.8%) with Cerecyte versus 0/119 (0%) bare platinum coils. There were 8 (3.4%) adverse procedural events resulting in neurological deterioration: 5/114 (4.4%) with Cerecyte versus 3/119 (2.5%) with bare platinum coils (P = .22). The 6-month mRS score of ≤2 was not significantly different in 103/109 (94.5%) patients with Cerecyte and 110/112 (98.2%) patients with bare platinum coils. Poor outcome (mRS score of ≥3 or death) was 6/109 (5.5%) with Cerecyte versus 2/112 (1.8%) with bare platinum coils (P = .070). For UIAs, there was no in-hospital mortality. There were 7 (2.7%) adverse procedural events with neurological deterioration, 5/133 (3.8%) with Cerecyte versus 2/131 (1.5%) with bare platinum coils (P = .13). There was a 6-month mRS score of ≤2 in 114/119 (95.8%) patients with Cerecyte versus 123/123 (100%) patients with bare platinum coils. There was poor outcome (mRS ≥3 and 1 death) in 5/119 (4.2%) patients with Cerecyte versus 0/123 (0%) patients with bare platinum coils (P = .011). CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistical excess of poor outcomes in the Cerecyte arm at discharge in the ruptured aneurysm group and at 6-month follow-up in the unruptured group. Overall adverse clinical outcomes and in-hospital mortality were exceptionally low in both groups.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".