Cognitive outcomes after unruptured intracranial aneurysm treatment with flow diversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Flow diversion is increasingly used to treat a variety of intracranial aneurysms with good safety and efficacy; however, there is some evidence that this treatment is associated with a larger postoperative ischemic burden on imaging than that with other traditional endovascular modalities. These findings typically do not manifest as neurological deficits, but any subtle effects on cognition remain unknown. In this study, the authors describe the neurocognitive performance of a cohort of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) before and after treatment with flow diversion. This is the first report of cognitive outcomes following aneurysm treatment with flow diversion. METHODS: The authors prospectively collected data on cognitive function using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) tool in patients with UIAs who were undergoing endovascular aneurysm treatment with flow diversion between June 2017 and July 2019. Patients completed the MoCA prior to intervention, at the 1-month follow-up after treatment, and again at 6 months after the procedure. All patients with UIAs treated with flow diversion were included regardless of age, aneurysm location, or morphology, unless their functional status precluded completion of the MoCA instrument. A repeated-measures linear mixed-effects model was used to compare preintervention and postintervention cognitive status at the time intervals outlined. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients with 61 aneurysms underwent endovascular aneurysm treatment with flow diversion (mean age 52.5 years, 90.2% females). There was no difference between baseline and postprocedure MoCA scores at any time interval (p > 0.05). The MoCA scores at baseline, 1 month postprocedure, and 6 months postprocedure were 26.1, 26.2, and 26.6, respectively. There was also no difference between pre- and postprocedure scores on any individual domain of the instrument (visuospatial, naming, attention, language, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation) at any time interval (p > 0.05). Thirty-four patients had follow-up MRI or CT imaging, 5 of whom showed radiographic changes or ischemia. All patients with follow-up clinical evaluation had a 6-month modified Rankin Scale score ≤ 2. CONCLUSIONS: Flow diversion is increasingly used in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. This study suggests that this treatment may not alter neurocognitive function. Larger patient samples and longer follow-ups with other tests of cognitive functions are needed to confirm these findings.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".