Clinical Outcomes After Endovascular Coiling in High-Grade Aneurysmal Hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: Our experience in Calgary was reviewed to determine the safety and clinical effectiveness of coiling in patients with high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH). METHODS: Patients with Hunt-Hess grades IV and V aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage who underwent endovascular coiling between January 1999 and April 2009 at Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada were reviewed. The primary outcome measure was the Modified Rankin Score after at least six months. Secondary outcome measures included extent of aneurysm occlusion and peri-procedural complications. In patients with favourable functional outcomes, Barthel's Index (BI), Re-integration to normal living index (RINL), and Zung depression scale (ZDS) were determined. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were identified (median age of 57 years; 73% female) and 69% were Hunt-Hess grade IV subarachnoid hemorrhage and 22 % were grade V. Endovascular coiling resulted in absence of residual flow into the aneurysm fundus in 91%. Only seven procedure-related complications occurred with no deaths attributed to the procedure. Vasospasm, hydrocephalus, and pneumonia were the most common non-procedural complications. Average follow-up was 27 +/- 17 months. Overall mortality was 32%, but 53% of patients had good functional outcome (mRS<3). Nine patients completed the BI, RINL, and ZDS with average BI 99 +/- 2, RINL 89 +/- 14, ZDS 33 +/- 11, suggesting minimal deficits in function and mood. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular coiling in patients with high-grade subarachnoid hemorrhage is safe. While the morbidity and mortality from high-grade aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage remains significant, favourable radiologic and functional outcomes can be achieved in a significant proportion of these critically ill 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".