Report of the Outcome of 6-year Blood Blister-Like Aneurysm Treatment Using Clipping Technique: A Single-Center Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blood blister-like aneurysms (BBA) are rare vascular lesions with challenging treatment. While direct surgery has been the primary technique for treating BBA, there has been a shift toward endovascular methods in recent years. This article presents a retrospective case series of patients treated with direct surgery at our center over a 6-year period.Patients who underwent surgery for BBA from 2014 to 2019 were evaluated. Data on surgical procedures, complications, and clinical outcomes were obtained from patients' medical records. Additionally, patients were contacted to provide updates on their treatment outcomes.A total of 17 patients were treated for BBA during the study period. All cases presented with subarachnoid hemorrhage and were treated using the clipping method. Intraoperative rupture occurred in 11 patients. Additionally, internal carotid artery sacrificing was done in five patients due to avulsion during surgery. Of these 17 patients, 11 (64.7%) had favorable outcomes following surgery, while the mortality rate was 29.4% (5 patients).The rate of favorable outcomes and mortality associated with the direct surgery technique at our center was comparable to results from other centers. Further studies are required to determine the optimal method for treating BBA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".