O-016 Immediate anatomical results after the endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial aneurysms: comparison of results with GDC and matrix coils in CLARITY series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To compare the quality of immediate anatomical results after the endovascular treatment of ruptured aneurysms using GDC and matrix coils in CLARITY series. Methods Postoperative anatomical results were evaluated on digital subtraction angiography, anonymously and independently by two experienced neuroradiologists. Two different scales were used: the Montreal scale and a new scale specifically designed for the present study (CLARITY scale). Results 401 aneurysms were treated using GDC coils and 373 using matrix coils. Immediate anatomical results (Montreal scale) were not significantly different with GDC or matrix coils. In the GDC group, the result was complete occlusion for 197 aneurysms (49.1%), neck remnant for 155 aneurysms (38.7%) and aneurysm remnant for 49 aneurysms (12.2%). In the matrix group, the result was complete occlusion for 168 aneurysms (44.9%), neck remnant for 171 aneurysms (45.7%) and aneurysm remnant for 35 aneurysms (9.4%). Similar results were obtained using the CLARITY scale. The factors affecting the quality of aneurismal occlusion have been studied in both the GDC and matrix groups. Conclusions The postoperative occlusion after endovascular treatment of ruptured aneurysms is satisfying with a high percentage of complete occlusion or neck remnant in both the GDC (87.8%) and matrix (90.6%) 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".