Transvenous Approach for the Treatment of cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations (TATAM): Study protocol of a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transvenous embolisation is a promising technique but the benefits remain uncertain. We hypothesised that transvenous embolisation leads to a higher rate of arteriovenous malformation angiographic occlusion than transarterial embolisation. METHODS: The Transvenous Approach for the Treatment of cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations (TATAM) is an investigator initiated, multicentre, prospective, phase 2, randomised controlled clinical trial. To test the hypothesis that transvenous embolisation is superior to transarterial embolisation for arteriovenous malformation obliteration, 76 patients with arteriovenous malformations considered curable by up to two sessions of endovascular therapy will be randomly allocated 1:1 to treatment with either transvenous embolisation (with or without transarterial embolisation) (experimental arm) or transarterial embolisation alone (control arm). The primary endpoint of the trial is complete arteriovenous malformation occlusion, assessed by catheter cerebral angiography. Complete occlusions will be confirmed at 3 months, while incompletely occluded arteriovenous malformations, considered treatment failures, will then be eligible for complementary treatments by surgery, radiation therapy, or even transvenous embolisation. Standard procedural safety outcomes will also be assessed. Patient selection will be validated by a case selection committee, and participating centres with limited experience in transvenous embolisation will be proctored. DISCUSSION: The TATAM trial is a transparent research framework designed to offer a promising but still unvalidated treatment to selected arteriovenous malformation patients. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03691870.
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 | 0.044 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.011 |
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".