The management of splenic artery aneurysm in patients awaiting liver transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Asthana S, Toso C, McCarthy M, Shapiro AMJ. The management of splenic artery aneurysm in patients awaiting liver transplantation. Clin Transplant 2010 DOI: 10.1111/j.1399‐0012.2009.01192.x © 2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Abstract: Splenic artery aneurysms (SAAs) are the third most common forms of intra‐abdominal aneurysm, and the most commonly encountered visceral aneurysms in the general population. SAAs occur more commonly in patients with portal hypertension and liver failure and, as such, are often encountered in patients undergoing high‐resolution abdominal imaging as part of a work‐up for liver transplantation. While rupture rates of between 2% and 10% have been reported in the literature, little is known about the natural history and behavior of these lesions in patients with liver disease. Interventional management options pose a challenge given the high anesthetic and surgical risk of such patients. This study was conducted to study the management of all SAAs diagnosed among patients presenting for a liver transplant assessment at a single center over a three‐yr period. We discuss the presentation and management options, with elective and emergent presentation of SAA in patients with end‐stage liver disease.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".