Adrenal gland function in a dog following unilateral complete adrenalectomy and contralateral partial adrenalectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CASE DESCRIPTION: A 40.3-kg (88.7-lb) 6-year-old spayed female Labrador Retriever was evaluated because of acute unilateral epistaxis. CLINICAL FINDINGS: During the initial evaluation of the dog, systemic hypertension and a left adrenal gland mass were detected. The left adrenal gland mass was surgically removed; results of histologic examination of the mass indicated it was a pheochromocytoma. Ten months later, the dog was evaluated because of persistent systemic hypertension and development of polyuria, polydipsia, and excessive panting. Abdominal ultrasonography revealed a mass in the cranial aspect of the right adrenal gland; results of MRI suggested the mass was a malignant tumor. TREATMENT AND OUTCOME: Epistaxis resolved after treatment and resolution of severe systemic hypertension. A partial right adrenalectomy was performed to remove the right adrenal gland mass. Results of histologic examination of the mass indicated it was a well-differentiated carcinoma of the cortex of the adrenal gland. Results of ACTH stimulation tests after surgery indicated the dog had adequate adrenal gland function. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Partial adrenalectomy may be a safe and feasible treatment option to preserve adrenal gland function in dogs with small eccentrically located adrenal gland masses, particularly for dogs that have undergone removal of the contralateral adrenal gland.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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".