Endovascular Management of Intracranial Dural Arteriovenous Fistulas: Transarterial Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this second of 3 review articles on the endovascular management of intracranial dural AVFs, we discuss transarterial treatment approaches. The treatment goal is to occlude the fistulous point, including the most distal portion of the arterial supply together with the most proximal portion of the draining vein (ie, the "foot" of the vein), which can be accomplished with liquid embolic agents via transarterial access. Anatomic factors to consider when assessing the safety and efficacy of a transarterial approach using liquid embolic agents include location, angioarchitecture, and proximity of arterial feeders to both the vasa nervosum of adjacent cranial nerves and the external carotid-internal carotid/vertebral artery anastomoses. Anatomic locations typically favorable for transarterial approaches include but are not limited to the transverse/sigmoid sinus, cerebral convexity, and superior sagittal sinus. In this review article, we discuss the technical approaches, outcomes, potential complications, and complication avoidance strategies for transarterial embolization.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".