Creation of a predictive calculator to determine adequacy of occlusion of the woven endobridge (WEB) device in intracranial aneurysms—A retrospective analysis of the WorldWide WEB Consortium database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Endovascular treatment with the woven endobridge (WEB) device has been widely utilized for managing intracranial aneurysms. However, predicting the probability of achieving adequate occlusion (Raymond–Roy classification 1 or 2) remains challenging. Objective Our study sought to develop and validate a predictive calculator for adequate occlusion using the WEB device via data from a large multi-institutional retrospective cohort. Methods We used data from the WorldWide WEB Consortium, encompassing 356 patients from 30 centers across North America, South America, and Europe. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed on a variety of demographic and clinical factors, from which predictive factors were selected. Calibration and validation were conducted, with variance inflation factor (VIF) parameters checked for collinearity. Results A total of 356 patients were included: 124 (34.8%) were male, 108 (30.3%) were elderly (≥65 years), and 118 (33.1%) were current smokers. Mean maximum aneurysm diameter was 7.09 mm (SD 2.71), with 112 (31.5%) having a daughter sac. In the multivariate regression, increasing aneurysm neck size (OR 0.706 [95% CI: 0.535–0.929], p = 0.13) and partial aneurysm thrombosis (OR 0.135 [95% CI: 0.024–0.681], p = 0.016) were found to be the only statistically significant variables associated with poorer likelihood of achieving occlusion. The predictive calculator shows a c-statistic of 0.744. Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test indicated a satisfactory model fit with a p-value of 0.431. The calculator is available at: https://neurodx.shinyapps.io/WEBDEVICE/ . Conclusion The predictive calculator offers a substantial contribution to the clinical toolkit for estimating the likelihood of adequate intracranial aneurysm occlusion by WEB device 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".