Efficacy of radiosurgery with and without angioembolization: A subgroup analysis of effectiveness in ruptured versus unruptured arteriovenous malformations – An updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Congenital arterial defects such as cerebral arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) increase brain bleeding risk. Conservative therapy, microsurgical removal, percutaneous embolization, stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), or a combination may treat this serious disease. This study compares angioembolization with SRS to SRS alone in ruptured or unruptured brain ateriovenous malformations (BAVM) patients. Methods: We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations for this study. Until September 2023, PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched for literature. English-language studies comparing SRS alone to embolization with SRS on ruptured or non-ruptured AVMs that could not be operated on were considered. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale assessed research study quality. Results: = 0.002). However, no notable differences were found in hemorrhagic events or radiation-induced changes between the two groups; however, the SRS-only group had a slightly greater, yet not statistically significant, mortality rate. Conclusion: Our data showed that ruptured brain AVMs had a much greater obliteration rate than unruptured ones, mostly due to SRS alone, without embolization. The aggregated data showed no significant changes, whereas SRS alone decreased radiation-induced alterations and hemorrhagic rates but with increased mortality. SRS alone may have a higher risk-to-reward ratio for nidus obliteration in ruptured brain AVM patients, so it should be used without embolization, although more research is needed to determine the effects of immediate and late complications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".