Pipeline embolization device thrombosis induced peri-construct collateral channels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than half a decade of experience and follow-up has now been accumulated with regard to flow diversion as a treatment for intracranial aneurysms; however, many uncertainties, such as the nature of aneurysmal remnants and the meaning of non-regressed, non-perfused aneurysmal masses, are still unknown. Here we discuss a 22-year-old man who presented with a grade 1 subarachnoid hemorrhage secondary to a dissecting right anterior cerebral artery aneurysm who was subsequently treated with a Pipeline Embolization Device construct. After ceasing dual antiplatelet therapy himself, he was found on MRI to have an area of increased aneurysmal remnant reperfusion. This was found to connect to multiple channels which reconstituted flow within the distal construct on angiography. The central area of construct thrombosis could not be visualized on MRI. The finding suggests that non-opacified aneurysmal remnants that have not regressed are biologically active and raises concerns regarding using MRI for long term follow-up.
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) | 0.000 | 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".