Catheterization During Adrenal Vein Sampling for Primary Aldosteronism: Failure to Use (1–24) <scp>ACTH</scp> May Increase Apparent Failure Rate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"Successful" adrenal vein catheterization in primary aldosteronism (PA) is often defined by a ratio of >3:1 of cortisol in the adrenal vein vs the inferior vena cava. Non-use of corticotropin (ACTH) during sampling may increase the apparent failure rate of adrenal vein catheterization due to lower cortisol levels. A retrospective study was performed on all patients with confirmed unilateral PA between June 2005 and August 2011. Adrenal vein sampling (AVS) included simultaneous bilateral baseline samples with repeat sampling 15 minutes after intravenous infusion of 250 μg of Cortrosyn (ACTH-S). Successful catheter placement was judged as adrenal cortisol:IVC cortisol of >3:1, applied to both baseline and ACTH-S samples and lateralization of aldosteronism was judged as normalized aldosterone/cortisol (A/C) ratio >3 times the contralateral A/C ratio. In ACTH-S samples, 94% of right-sided catheterizations were biochemically successful with 100% success on the left. Among baseline samples, only 47% of right- and 44% of left-sided samples met the 3:1 cortisol criteria. However, 95% of apparent "failed" baseline cortisol sets still showed lateralization of A/C ratios that matched the ultimate pathology. Non-ACTH-stimulated samples may be incorrectly judged as failed catheter placement when a 3:1 ratio is used. ACTH-stimulated sampling is the preferred means to confirm catheterization during AVS.
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 | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".