Recanalization of Chronic Refractory Central Venous Occlusions Utilizing a Radiofrequency Guidewire Perforation Technique
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the technical success rate and safety of radiofrequency perforation guidewire (RF) technology for the recanalization of refractory chronic central venous occlusions in symptomatic hemodialysis patients with failed conventional endovascular methods. METHODS: This single center retrospective cohort of hemodialysis patients comprised of six men (mean age 67 years, range 55 to 80) with autogenous fistulae, who had already undergone failed conventional endovascular methods. These patients underwent the RF perforation technique from December 2006 to January 2010. RESULTS: Three patients were successfully treated using the RF perforation technique, after which they had PTFE stent grafts placed at the site of occlusion. There was no recurrence of clinical symptoms. In the remaining three patients, the procedure was terminated after multiple unsuccessful attempts. There were no complications. CONCLUSIONS: The RF perforation technique is a potential alternative technology for recanalization of refractory chronic central venous occlusions in hemodialysis patients in the setting of failed conventional endovascular recanalization techniques.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it