MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Induration of the Cricoid Cartilage Complicates Prosthetic Laryngoplasty in a Horse

2010· article· en· W2065887745 on OpenAlexaff
Dane M. Tatarniuk, James L. Carmalt, Andrew L. Allen

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCricoid cartilageLaryngoplastyLarynxCartilageSurgeryThyroid cartilageAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report intraoperative complications during needle penetration and suture placement through the cricoid cartilage during a prosthetic laryngoplasty procedure. STUDY DESIGN: Case report. METHODS: An 11-year-old American Paint gelding with grade IV left laryngeal hemiplegia underwent a terminal prosthetic laryngoplasty for teaching purposes. Passage of the needle through the cricoid cartilage was difficult and resulted in needle breakage before eventual success using a new needle. The larynx was examined postmortem. RESULTS: Palpation of the larynx revealed hardening of the cricoid cartilage. Radiographic examination indicated the presence of diffuse radiopaque speckling. Histologic examination did not find accumulations of calcium salts, rather it revealed a loss of proteoglycans within the cricoid cartilage. CONCLUSIONS: Laryngeal mineralization occurs in the horse and human with advancing age. The loss of proteoglycan and subsequent stiffening of the cricoid cartilage likely resulted in the intraoperative complications noted in this report. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Radiographic examination of the larynx before performing a prosthetic laryngoplasty may reveal the presence of areas of increased radiodensity. The interpretation of this is to be made with caution as it may represent mineralization, or hardening due to the changes in proteoglycan concentration, monomer size or charge.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary SurgerySame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207