MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416139776 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaf201.1568

SURG-11. Efficacy of Radiosurgery with and without Angioembolization:A Subgroup Analysis of Effectiveness in Ruptured versusUnruptured Arteriovenous Malformations.An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2025· article· en· W4416139776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hamza Khan, Abdul Basit Sangah, Roua Nasir, Saad Akhtar Khan, Shazia Saleem Shaikh, Ikhlas Ahmed, Naveed Zaman Akhunzada, Oswin Godfrey

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiosurgeryEmbolizationPercutaneousArteriovenous malformationSubgroup analysisIntracranial Arteriovenous Malformations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract INTRODUCTION Congenital arterial defects such cerebral arteriovenous malformations 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 BAVM patients. Methodology: We followed PRISMA 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 couldn’t be operated on were considered. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale assessed research study quality. RESULTS Results included 46 studies with a total of 7077 participants. There was a greater obliteration rate in the SRS-only group (60.4%) than in the embolization plus SRS group (49.73%). Particularly in the SRS-only group, ruptured AVMs showed a noticeably greater obliteration rate than unruptured AVMs (p=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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.049
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicVascular Malformations Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207