Treatment of large intracranial aneurysms using the Woven EndoBridge (WEB): a propensity score-matched analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device is primarily used for treating wide-neck intracranial bifurcation aneurysms under 10 mm. Limited data exists on its efficacy for large aneurysms. We aim to assess angiographic and clinical outcomes of the WEB device in treating large versus small aneurysms. We conducted a retrospective review of the WorldWide WEB Consortium database, from 2011 to 2022, across 30 academic institutions globally. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to compare small and large aneurysms on baseline characteristics. A total of 898 patients were included. There was no significant difference observed in clinical presentations, smoking status, pretreatment mRS, presence of multiple aneurysms, bifurcation location, or prior treatment between the two groups. After PSM, 302 matched pairs showed significantly lower last follow-up adequate occlusion rates (81% vs 90%, p = 0.006) and higher retreatment rates (12% vs 3.6%, p < 0.001) in the large aneurysm group. These findings may inform treatment decisions and patient counseling. Future studies are needed to further explore this area.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".