MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409920846 · doi:10.1016/j.bas.2025.104262

Multidimensional outcome after endovascular or microsurgical occlusion of ruptured intracranial aneurysms – Comparative analysis of a prospective Swiss multicenter study

2025· article· en· W4409920846 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vincens Kälin, Martin N. Stienen, Olivia Zindel-Geisseler, Noemi Dannecker, Yannick Rothacher, Ladina Schlosser, Julia Velz, Martina Sebök, Noëmi Eggenberger, Adrien May, Philippe Bijlenga, Ursula Guerra-Lopez, Rodolfo Maduri, Daniele Starnoni, Valérie Beaud, Alessio Chiappini, Thomas Robert, Sara Bonasia, Stefania Rossi, Johannes Goldberg, Christian Fung, David Bervini, Klemens Gutbrod, Nicolai Maldaner, Severin Früh, Marc Schwind, Anna-Maria Zeitlberger, Isabel C. Hostettler, Oliver Bozinov, Peter Brugger, Menno R. Germans, Luca Regli

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain and Spine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIdorsia PharmaceuticalsUniversitätsspital Zürich
KeywordsMedicineOcclusionOutcome (game theory)Multicenter studyEndovascular treatmentAneurysmSurgeryRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Despite advances in cerebral aneurysm treatment, information on detailed outcomes remains limited. We compared complications and multidimensional outcomes in alert aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) patients (GCS ≥13) who received clipping or coiling after individualized decisions were made through multidisciplinary board discussions. Research question: Are there significant differences in multidimensional outcomes between clipping and coiling treatments for alert aSAH patients when treatment selection is individualized? Material and methods: Within the prospective MoCA-DCI study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03032471), patients with a GCS of 13-15 72h post-aSAH in six neurovascular centers underwent neuropsychological (Montreal Cognitive Assessment; MoCA), neurological (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; NIHSS), headache (visual analog scale; VAS), disability (modified Rankin Scale; mRS) and health-related quality of life (EuroQol Five Dimensions; EQ5D) assessments within 72h, 14 days and three months after aSAH. We compared these multidimensional outcomes and complications for clipped and coiled patients. Results: Of 126 patients (mean age 53.8 years; 63.9 % female), 84 were coiled and 42 clipped. MoCA scores for clipped vs coiled patients were 23(7) vs 23(8; p = 0.250), 25(8) vs 28(5; p = 0.346), and 27(4) vs 28(5; p = 0.481). Normal cognition (MoCA ≥26) was achieved within 72h by 28.6 % of coiled and 40.5 % of clipped patients (p = 0.179). Complication rates were similar, though surgical patients had higher intraprocedural rupture rates (p = 0.027). Clipped patients reported higher headaches at three months (p = 0.013), while NIHSS, mRS and EQ5D showed no differences. Discussion and conclusion: After interdisciplinary selection of the most appropriate treatment, similar favorable outcomes can be achieved in alert aSAH patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain and SpineSame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207