Noninfectious Ascending Aortitis: A Case Series of 64 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the clinical presentation and histopathologic characteristics of noninfectious ascending aortitis. METHODS: A retrospective medical record and histopathology review was performed of patients with histologic evidence of active noninfectious aortitis who underwent ascending aortic aneurysm resection at Mayo Clinic between January 1, 2000, and February 28, 2006. Clinicopathologic features were recorded, including demographics, clinical presentation, laboratory, imaging findings, histopathology, complications, treatment, and outcome. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (50% women) were identified; the majority were Caucasian (83%) and elderly (mean age 69.1 yrs). Upon initial presentation, 45% had aneurysm-related symptoms, 33% were asymptomatic, 12.5% had constitutional symptoms, 4.7% had symptoms referable to cranial arteries, and 9.4% had polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) symptoms. The majority (81%) were of "isolated" variant, with no rheumatologic history. Mean preoperative erythrocyte sedimentation rate was 16.2 +/- 23.3 mm/h (n = 20). Additional vascular imaging abnormalities were present in 72% of patients, including stenoses and/or ectasia of major aortic branches and descending thoracic or abdominal aneurysms. Giant cells were seen in 71.9%. Median followup time was 15.4 months, during which 6 (9.4%) patients died. Only 22 (34%) patients received corticosteroids, with uncertain effect on development of recurrent aneurysms, rupture, or dissections. CONCLUSION: Noninfectious ascending aortitis frequently occurs even in the absence of history, symptoms, or signs of giant cell arteritis (GCA) or PMR. When discovered, such patients should be followed closely, as a majority have additional vascular abnormalities. More studies are needed to determine optimal strategies for surveillance, detection, and treatment of ascending aortitis, which may represent a clinical entity distinct from classical GCA.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".