Assessment of brain aneurysms by using high-resolution magnetic resonance angiography after endovascular coil delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Digital subtraction (DS) angiography is the current gold standard of assessing intracranial aneurysms after coil placement. Magnetic resonance (MR) angiography offers a noninvasive, low-risk alternative, but its accuracy in delineating coil-treated aneurysms remains uncertain. The objective of this study, therefore, is to compare a high-resolution MR angiography protocol relative to DS angiography for the evaluation of coil-treated aneurysms. METHODS: In 2003, the authors initiated a prospective protocol of following up patients with coil-treated brain aneurysms using both 1.5-tesla gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography and biplanar DS angiography. Using acquired images, the subject aneurysm was independently scored for degree of remnant identified (complete obliteration, residual neck, or residual aneurysm) and the surgeon's ability to visualize the parent vessel (excellent, fair, or poor). RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients with 42 coil-treated aneurysms were enrolled for a total of 44 paired MR angiography-DS angiography tests (median 9 days between tests). An excellent correlation was found between DS and MR angiography for assessing any residual aneurysm, but not for visualizing the parent vessel (K = 0.86 for residual aneurysm and 0.10 for parent vessel visualization). Paramagnetic artifact from the coil mass was minimal, and in some cases MR angiography identified contrast permeation into the coil mass not revealed by DS angiography. An intravascular microstent typically impeded proper visualization of the parent vessel on MR angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance angiography is a noninvasive and safe means of follow-up review for patients with coil-treated brain aneurysms. Compared with DS angiography, MR angiography accurately delineates residual aneurysm necks and parent vessel patency (in the absence of a stent), and offers superior visualization of contrast filling within the coil mass. Use of MR angiography may obviate the need for routine diagnostic DS angiography in select patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".