A Pitfall of Radioisotope Quantification of the Ratio of Pulmonary Blood Flow to Systemic Blood Flow (Qp/Qs) in a Patient With Severe Postoperative Pulmonary Venous Obstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We report a case with initial misinterpretation of the radionuclide angiocardiographic study that was obtained in a child with persistent tachypnea and concern for residual left to right shunt after prior repair of total anomalous pulmonary veins and an atrial septal defect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ultrasound, radionuclide angiocardiogram, and magnetic resonance imaging studies were obtained. RESULTS: The radionuclide study was ordered after an unremarkable ultrasound. Unsuspected severely reduced left pulmonary arterial flow associated with high-grade ipsilateral pulmonary venous obstruction led to misinterpretation of the radionuclide study as a large residual shunt. Later replotting of the graphic data using each lung separately corrected the error. Magnetic resonance played a key role in making the correct diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Significant asymmetric pulmonary flow due to vascular obstruction is an important additional potential pitfall to recognize in interpreting radionuclide angiocardiographic studies.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".