MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762535710 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a5403

Endovascular Treatment of Vein of Galen Malformations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017· review· en· W2762535710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPerioperativePediatricsStroke (engine)SurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>BACKGROUND:</h3> Outcomes after endovascular embolization of vein of Galen malformations remain relatively poorly described. <h3>PURPOSE:</h3> We performed a systematic review of the literature to determine outcomes and predictors of good outcomes following endovascular treatment of vein of Galen malformations. <h3>DATA SOURCES:</h3> We used Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and the Web of Science. <h3>STUDY SELECTION:</h3> Our study consisted of all case series with ≥4 patients receiving endovascular treatment of vein of Galen malformations published through January 2017. <h3>DATA ANALYSIS:</h3> We studied the following outcomes: complete/near-complete occlusion rates, technical complications, perioperative stroke, perioperative hemorrhage, technical mortality, all-cause mortality, poor neurologic outcomes, and good neurologic outcomes. Outcomes were stratified by age-group (neonate, infant, child). A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. <h3>DATA SYNTHESIS:</h3> A total of 27 series with 578 patients were included; 41.9% of patients were neonates, 45.0% of patients were infants, and 13.1% of patients were children. All-cause mortality was 14.0% (95% CI, 8.0%–22.0%). Overall good neurologic outcome rates were 62.0% (95% CI, 57.0%–67.0%). Overall poor neurologic outcome rates were 21.0% (95% CI, 17.0%–26.0%). Neonates were significantly less likely to have good neurologic outcomes than infants (48.0%; 95% CI, 35.0%–62.0% versus 77.0%; 95% CI, 70.0%–84.0%; <i>P</i> &lt; .01). Treatment indications following the Bicêtre neonatal evaluation score resulted in significantly higher rates of good neurologic outcome (<i>P</i> = .04). Patients with congestive heart failure had significantly lower rates of good neurologic outcome (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.28–0.88; <i>P</i> = .01). <h3>LIMITATIONS:</h3> Limitations were selection and publication biases. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> Patients receiving endovascular embolization of vein of Galen malformations experienced good long-term clinical outcomes in &gt;60% of cases. Appropriate patient selection is key as treatment guided by the Bicêtre neonatal evaluation score was associated with improved neurologic outcomes.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0180.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.237 · 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