MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018698336 · doi:10.1002/ccd.21085

Percutaneous coronary artery fistula closurein adults: Technical and procedural aspects

2007· article· en· W2018698336 on OpenAlexaff
Nicholas Collins, Rohit Mehta, Lee Benson, Eric Horlick

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Artery Anomalies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneousOcclusionSurgeryFistulaEmbolizationLumen (anatomy)Coronary stealCatheterRadiologyPopulationCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery fistulae (CAF) are an uncommon congenital anomaly characterized by an abnormal connection between the coronary arteries and cardiac chambers or vessels without traversing the usual capillary network. CAF are associated with a number of well-described symptomatic sequelae, which may necessitate treatment. With a tendency for symptoms to develop over time, symptomatic CAF may present for the first time in adulthood, with limited data existing on the technical aspects related to transcatheter fistula closure in adults. METHODS: We describe our experience in percutaneous closure of CAF in an exclusively adult population, with an emphasis on the various procedural features of device closure in this patient group. RESULTS: Attempted transcatheter CAF closure was performed in 14 patients between 1990 and 2006. Procedural success was achieved in 11 patients, with vessel tortuosity and lumen caliber important limitations in occlusion device delivery. Procedural complications included vessel dissection and device embolization. CONCLUSION: Transcatheter occlusion is a safe and effective method of therapy for symptomatic adults with CAF.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations45
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCoronary Artery AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207