MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

P-027 The Role of Interventional Therapy in Head and Neck Arteriovenous Malformations

2014· article· en· W2326401013 on OpenAlexaff
Adam A. Dmytriw, Karel G. terBrugge, Timo Krings, Ronit Agid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroInterventional Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations and Hemangiomas
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmbolizationHead and neckSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Head and neck arteriovenous malformations (H&amp;N AVM) are challenging to treat, and impart clinical and psychosocial morbidity. We evaluated the role of endovascular therapy and its success with varying presentations and characteristics. <h3>Methods</h3> Our retrospective period spanned 1984 to 2013, and included any patients who received neurointerventional treatment. Candidate AVMs involved the scalp, orbit, maxillofacial, and upper neck. All available clinical, surgical, interventional and imaging records were reviewed. <h3>Results</h3> 89 patients with H&amp;N AVMs received endovascular therapy, including 48 small and 41 large lesions. The goals of treatment were identified as curative (n = 30), palliative (n = 34), or presurgical (n = 25). The average number of treatment sessions per patient was 1.5. The goal of treatment was met in 92.1% of cases, and cure was achieved in 42 patients accounting for 58.4% of the total patients for all categories. 28 patients were cured by embolization alone (31.4%) of which 18 were single-hole AVFs. 24 received presurgical embolization (27%) and were cured by subsequent excision. 30 patients reported adequate palliation of their complaints (33.7%). 7 patients suffered transient and 2 permanent endovascular treatment complications. <h3>Conclusion</h3> Interventional treatment can be curative, particularly in small AVMs, with surgical excision as an important option. However, the role of endovascular therapy should not be underestimated in terms of palliation of large lesions, including complex incurable lesions. <h3>Disclosures</h3> A. Dmytriw: None. K. terBrugge: None. T. Krings: None. R. Agid: None.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroInterventional SurgerySame topicVascular Malformations and HemangiomasFrench-language works237,207