Endovascular treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms: the eCLIPs device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endovascular clip system device, eCLIPs (eVasc, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada), was introduced almost a decade ago for the treatment of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysms,1-3 which represent a challenge for both endovascular and surgical approaches. Several techniques and devices (intrasaccular or intra-arterial) have been introduced and are currently available in order to improve the technical and clinical outcomes of aneurysm embolization. Flow diversion and flow disruption have shown controversial results in this subtype of aneurysm. In this video we present the use of the eCLIPs device to treat a ruptured, wide-neck aneurysm of the top of the basilar artery. The decisional approach, technical details, and the different steps of the endovascular treatment are described. The final part of the video is dedicated to the characteristics of the device for re-endothelialization4 and flow diversion (video 1).5 neurintsurg;16/3/229/V1F1V1Video 1 .
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".