Trans-Aortic Counterpulsation: A Viable Alternative?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transthoracic intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) insertion has been a relatively rare and uncommon procedure. However, it is an established beneficial option in patients with severe peripheral vascular disease (PVD) accompanied with bi-lateral femoral arterial occlusion. There are several viable alternatives to trans-aortic IABP insertion, including trans-axillary or in abdominal aorta (requiring a laparotomy). Cardiac surgery has the advantage of an open sternum, facilitating effortless direct intra-aortic balloon (IAB) insertion into the aorta. The IAB can be inserted either through a 9-mm graft or directly into the ascending aorta. During cardiac surgery, direct insertion into the ascending aorta with the balloon tip lying distally in the abdominal aorta is facilitated with an open sternum. The base of the balloon lies approximately 2 cm below the left subclavian and can be confirmed through a trans-esophageal echocardiogram (TEE). Elimination of a graft insertion saves the team from time-consuming maneuvers and additional hemorrhagic complications. In our experience, postoperative vasoplegic syndrome coupled with myocardial edema contributed to patent instability and was treated with vasopressin and transthoracic IAB insertion. The CS 100 (Datascope Corp., Mahwah, NJ) console allowed the ability to time the balloon accurately. This case report details our experience with one such patient and establishes trans-aortic counter-pulsation as a safe and viable option in patients with severe PVD, where percutaneous insertion is precluded or has failed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".