ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2022
Towards Automatic Prediction of Outcome in Treatment of Cerebral Aneurysms.
Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Radiomics and Artificial Intelligence in Intracranial Aneurysm Management.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of NeuroimagingPooled it
- A Machine learning pipeline to investigate tissue ingrowth in cerebral aneurysms using preclinical animal models.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Intrasaccular therapy in wide-neck intracranial aneurysms: a narrative review.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Intrasaccular Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Role of artificial intelligence and machine learning in the diagnosis of cerebrovascular disease.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Intrasaccular flow disruptors treat cerebral aneurysms by diverting the blood flow from the aneurysm sac. Residual flow into the sac after the intervention is a failure that could be due to the use of an undersized device, or to vascular anatomy and clinical condition of the patient. We report a machine learning model based on over 100 clinical and imaging features that predict the outcome of wide-neck bifurcation aneurysm treatment with an intrasaccular embolization device. We combine clinical features with a diverse set of common and novel imaging measurements within a random forest model. We also develop neural network segmentation algorithms in 2D and 3D to contour the sac in angiographic images and automatically calculate the imaging features. These deliver 90% overlap with manual contouring in 2D and 83% in 3D. Our predictive model classifies complete vs. partial occlusion outcomes with an accuracy of 75.31%, and weighted F1-score of 0.74.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37128435PMC10148316What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.