MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024498792 · doi:10.5301/jva.2010.101

Ultrahigh-Pressure Angioplasty versus the Peripheral Cutting Balloon<sup>™</sup> for Treatment of Stenoses in Autogenous Fistulas: Comparison of Immediate Results

2010· article· en· W2024498792 on OpenAlex
Sanjoy Kundu, Rick Clemens, Jonathan Aziza, Paul Tam, Gordon Nagai, John M. You, Victoria Au

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Vascular Access · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBalloonCutting balloonPeripheralAngioplastyMedicineHigh pressureRadiologySurgeryInternal medicineStentRestenosisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare the immediate results of ultrahigh-pressure (UHP) balloons vs. peripheral cutting balloons (PCB) for the treatment of stenoses associated with autogenous fistulas using intra-access blood flow measurements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective randomized study consisted of 22 hemodialysis (HD) patients with autogenous fistulas who had decreased intra-access blood flow (<500 mL/min). All patients underwent a fistulogram and intraprocedural blood flow measurements. Patients were randomized once into two groups; one group undergoing UHP angioplasty and the second group undergoing PCB angioplasty. Randomization occurred once after the diagnostic fistulogram and each patient in each arm only underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with either UHP or PCB. The study cohort consisted of 12 patients in the UHP group and 10 patients in the PCB group. Data collected included fistula anatomy, degree of stenosis, length of stenosis, balloon specifications and residual stenosis. RESULTS: The 22 study patients underwent 35 angioplasty procedures; 23 in the UHP group (12 patients) and 12 in the PCB group (10 patients). The technical success rate was 91%. The pre-intervention mean blood flow was 288 mL/min in the UHP group and 391 mL/min in the PCB group. The post-intervention mean blood flow was 613 mL/min in the UHP group and 606 mL/min in the PCB group. The mean increase in blood flow was 325.8 mL/min in the UHP group and 213 mL/min in the PCB group. This represents a relative mean increase in blood flow of 253% in the UHP group and 85% in the PCB group. An unpaired t-test showed there was no significant difference between the groups with respect to pre-flow, post-flow, and mean and relative mean increase in flow. There were two failures; one in the UHP group and one in the PCB group. There was one minor complication (2.8%) but no major complications. CONCLUSIONS: In this small group of HD patients with autogenous fistulas our comparison of UHP to the PCB demonstrated that the immediate results, as determined by measurement of intra-access blood flow, were equivalent. Further long-term follow-up will be required to determine the longevity of these results.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.329 · 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