MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135478242 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a1124

Characterization of Aneurysm Remnants after Endovascular Treatment: Contrast-Enhanced MR Angiography versus Catheter Digital Subtraction Angiography

2008· article· en· W2135478242 on OpenAlexaff
Ronit Agid, Robert A. Willinsky, S. K. Lee, Karel G. terBrugge, Richard Farb

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDigital subtraction angiographyAneurysmRadiologyAngiographyMagnetic resonance angiographyCatheterNuclear medicineMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A substantial percentage of coiled aneurysms are associated with persistent filling of an aneurysmal component due to incomplete initial treatment or re-growth. Traditionally follow-up of coiled aneurysms has consisted of repeated intra-arterial cerebral catheter angiography, an invasive procedure with associated risks. Hence, many authors have advocated the use of non-invasive imaging techniques for this purpose. Our aim was to compare contrast-enhanced MR angiography (CE-MRA) with digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for depiction of aneurysmal remnants of coiled cerebral aneurysms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Aneurysms coiled between September 2003 and October 2006 were retrospectively reviewed. We included patients meeting the following criteria: 1) residual/recurrent aneurysm measuring 2 mm or greater, and 2) CE-MRA and DSA performed no more than 60 days apart. Three readers were asked to determine which technique was superior for characterization of the aneurysmal remnant: CE-MRA, DSA, or indeterminate. Statistical analysis included most rule and kappa statistics. RESULTS: Of 232 patients who underwent coiling, 44 met the inclusion criteria (33 women and 11 men; 24-72 years of age). Sixteen patients had neck remnants and 28 had body remnants. The first study to identify the remnant was DSA in 35 patients and CE-MRA in 9. In 32 patients (32/44, 73%), the readers indicated that CE-MRA was superior to DSA for remnant characterization. CE-MRA and DSA were thought to be equivalent in 7 (16%), and DSA was preferred in 3 (7%). Two cases (5%) yielded ambiguous results. Of the 28 body remnants, 22 (78.6%) were characterized by remnant protrusion into the coil mass: In 20 of these (91%), the readers preferred CE-MRA over DSA, and in 2 cases (9%), the techniques were thought to be equivalent. CONCLUSION: In patients with known aneurysm remnants, CE-MRA is at least equivalent to DSA for characterization of aneurysmal remnants after coiling. Contrast filling within the coil mass was more clearly seen with CE-MRA than with DSA.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207