Early major recurrence of cerebral aneurysms after satisfactory initial coiling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Early major recurrence (EMR) of cerebral aneurysms treated by coiling has not been investigated. The purpose of this study is to characterize the frequency and risk factors of this phenomenon. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients who presented with ruptured and unruptured cerebral aneurysms and underwent coiling from July 2009 to June 2019 at a university hospital. We defined EMR as recurrence of the aneurysm greater than its initial size within the first 6 months of an initial satisfactory coil embolization. Patient demographics, clinical information, aneurysm characteristics, angiographic and technical details were reviewed. RESULTS: From July 2009 to June 2019, 338 aneurysms (190 unruptured aneurysms and 148 ruptured cerebral aneurysms) underwent coiling and satisfied our study criteria. Among these patients, 23 patients (19 ruptured and 4 unruptured aneurysms) were found to have recurrent aneurysm. Of those, 4 were found to have early major aneurysm regrowth occurring within 6 months after coiling (1.2%). The detection of the EMR was as early as 4 weeks and as late as 20 weeks after the initial coil embolization. The average detection time was 10 ± 7.2 weeks (mean ± SD, range:4-20 weeks). In each case, the recurrent aneurysm cavity was more than twice the initial size of presentation. All aneurysms with major recurrence were ruptured with low aspect ratios (dome height to neck ratio) and involved a communicating segment. All patients underwent successful retreatment of the recurrent aneurysm with good outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Early major recurrence of treated aneurysms is a rare but important complication that harbors an impending risk of re-rupture. Early control angiography after endovascular coiling may be warranted for small ruptured aneurysms, even in cases in which the initial result seems technically satisfactory.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".