E-019 treatment of intracranial dural arteriovenous fistulas refractory to endovascular therapy with gamma knife radiosurgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction We sought to review all cases of dural arteriovenous fistulas (AVFs) treated at our institution treated with Gamma Knife radiosurgery following failed endovascular management. Methods Patients with intracranial dural AVFs treated by Gamma Knife from 2000 to 2015 were evaluated retrospectively. These included Borden I–III lesions spanning any angioarchitecture. Patient’s clinical files, radiological images, catheter angiograms, and surgical reports were reviewed. Results 15 patients with dural AVFs treated by Gamma Knife radiosurgery were identified. All 15 patients treated reported either symptomatic palliation or cure of their symptoms. Angiographic cure, when present, occurred at a mean time of 2 years following radiosurgical treatment. There was no significant association between Borden type and cure-rate, and failed endovascular treatment was not associated with lower rates of palliation and cure. Conclusions The number of feeders supplying a lesions is associated with treatment challenge, whereas Borden type appears not to be. Stereotactic radiosurgery is a safe and effective method for the treatment of dural arteriovenous malformation both as a de novo approach or as an adjunct to endovascular embolotherapy. Disclosures A. Dmytriw: None. M. Schwartz: 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".