Transient in-stent stenosis at mid-term angiographic follow-up in patients treated with SILK flow diverter stents: incidence, clinical significance and long-term follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about in-stent stenosis (ISS) in patients with aneurysms treated with flow diverter (FD) stents. The reported incidence in the literature varies significantly. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, severity, distribution, clinical significance, and possible predictors for ISS. METHODS: Between July 2012 and June 2016 we retrospectively reviewed all patients treated with SILK FDs in our center. Only cases with short-term (4±2 months) and long-term (>1 year) follow-ups with digital subtraction angiograms were included. ISS was graded as mild (<25%), moderate (25-50%) or severe (>50%). The following predictors for ISS were assessed: gender, age, the presence of subarachnoid hemorrhage, aneurysm size, location, occlusion status, and post-stenting angioplasty. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. At mid-term follow-up, ISS was observed in 16/36 patients (44%). Eleven patients (69%) had mild ISS, three (19%) moderate, and two (12%) severe ISS. ISS was diffuse in 11 patients (69%) and focal in five patients (31%). All patients were asymptomatic. Thirteen patients were maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy and three on aspirin alone. At long-term follow-up, complete ISS resolution was seen in 11 patients, improvement in three and worsening in two patients. No de novo ISS occurrence was observed. On univariate analysis there was no significant predictor for ISS. CONCLUSIONS: Transient ISS after FD deployment is a common asymptomatic finding on mid-term angiographic follow-up. Complete resolution or improvement at long-term follow-up is seen in most patients who are maintained on dual antiplatelet therapy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".