P.097 Safety of intrarterial reopro in thrombotic complications during coiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Abciximab is used for the treatment of thromboembolism occuring during endovascular procedures, however the experience with intra-arterial infusion is limited. The objective is to evaluate its safety and effectiveness during coiling complications. Methods: From an aneurysm coiling database, patients treated with intra-arterial abciximab due to thrombotic complications were selected. Patient were classified either as non-ruptured aneurysm for elective coiling or presenting with subarachnoid hemorrhage. They all had preand post-procedure cerebral angiography performed at our institution as part of routine work-up. Success rate was based on recanalization seen on cerebral angiography. Complications of using abciximab were reported. Results: 35 of 441 coiling patients had a thrombotic complication. 13 of them were treated using intra-arterial infusion of abciximab. 2 patients were male, median age 59. 6 patients presented with sub-arachnoid haemorrhage. 84 % of patients had at least partial recanalization, while 38 % experienced complete recanalization of the parent vessel. 45 % of patients had complications, none severe. 2 patients had aneurysm recanalization, 3 distal migration of thrombus and 1 had haemorrhage (non ruptured aneurysm). Conclusions: Inspite of being considered a safer alternative, use of intrarterial abciximab has potential risks, including hemorrhage, distal thromboembolism and aneurysm recanalization.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".