Review of intraluminal optical coherence tomography imaging for cerebral aneurysms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cerebral aneurysms are an abnormal ballooning of blood vessels which have the potential to rupture and cause hemorrhagic stroke. The diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of cerebral aneurysms is highly dependant on high resolution imaging. As an imaging modality capable of cross-sectional resolution down to 10 μm, intraluminal optical coherence tomography (OCT) has great potential in improving care for cerebral aneurysms. The ability to assess the blood vessel microanatomy in vivo may be able to predict aneurysm growth and rupture. During treatment, intraluminal OCT may aid in assessment of treatment efficacy and complication avoidance, such as via visualization of in-stent thrombosis, stent wall apposition, and the fate of covered branch vessels. This technology can also be used in post-treatment monitoring, to assess for aneurysmal remnants or for endothelialisation and healing over the diseased segments. The goal of this clinically focused narrative review is to provide an overview of the previous applications of intraluminal OCT in cerebral aneurysms and future prospects of applying this technology to improve care in patients with cerebral aneurysms, including a specific neurovascular OCT catheter, doppler OCT for high resolution blood flow assessment, and further research endeavors.
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.
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 it