VISUAL FLOW study: Ophthalmologic outcomes following carotid aneurysm treatment using a flow-diverter stent covering the origin of the ophthalmic artery in patients under dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and ticagrelor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The use of flow-diverting stents (FDS) for intracranial aneurysms has become common practice. This study aimed to evaluate ophthalmologic outcomes following carotid-ophthalmic aneurysm treatment with an FDS covering the origin of the ophthalmic artery in patients receiving aspirin and ticagrelor, through a systematic ophthalmic screening. METHODS: From January 2021 to October 2023, patients treated for carotid-ophthalmic aneurysms with an FDS were prospectively included in our study. All patients underwent a systematic ophthalmologic examination prior to treatment, within 15 days after embolization and 6 months post-embolization. Each patient received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor for 3 months, followed by aspirin alone. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients with 25 aneurysms were included. Median age (IQR) was 55 years and 22 were females. Although all patients were asymptomatic, fundus examination revealed pathological findings on the treated side in 6 patients (25%) within the first 15 days after treatment: cotton wool spots in 5 patients (20%), retinal hemorrhages in 3 patients (12%), and multifocal choroidal ischemia in 1 patient (4%). All abnormalities detected during the postoperative fundus examination had resolved by 6 months. No thromboembolic complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Retinal and choroidal changes occurred in 25% of patients treated with an FDS covering the ophthalmic artery in the setting of DAPT. While these changes were asymptomatic and spontaneously resolved, these findings warrant further consideration. Additional studies are needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".