Timing of complications during and after elective endovascular intracranial aneurysm coiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the time to complications during and after elective endovascular intracranial aneurysm coiling. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing elective endovascular aneurysm coiling between March 2006 and October 2013 in one large Eastern Canadian Neurointerventional Service was performed. Data regarding the incidence, time and type of complication related to the endovascular coiling procedure and clinical outcome at last follow-up were collected. Patient, aneurysm and operation factors were analyzed to determine any factors associated with complication occurrence. RESULTS: Of the 150 patient procedures analyzed, 16% experienced a coiling-related complication, although none resulted in death. 6.7% of patients experienced an intraoperative complication, of which thromboembolism was the most common type. The majority of the complications were detected in the first 6 hours after reversal of anesthesia, and a small proportion the next morning prior to discharge. Only 3.3% of patients had persistent neurological deficit after the procedure on last follow-up. Duration of the operation demonstrated a strong association with the occurrence of procedure-related complications. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that coiling-related complications of elective endovascular coiling tend to occur either intraoperatively or are detected shortly after reversal of anesthesia. Further investigation with a larger cohort may help to guide important preoperative communication with patients and identify a select group of patients who may not necessarily require prolonged admission to hospital for observation.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".