MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Specific Shortcomings of Endograft Design

2008· article· en· W2090066055 on OpenAlexaff
Tieying Yin, Robert Guidoin, Marc M. Corriveau, Mark Nutley, Lu Xu, Г. Маринов, Lu Wang, Yahye Merhi, Robert McGregor, Ze Zhang, Yvan Douville, Stéphane Turgeon, Martin W. King, Oren K. Steinmetz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolyesterMaterials scienceStentPolypropyleneAbrasion (mechanical)Fibrous jointSurgeryComposite materialMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Further to the rapid enlargement of an aneurysm to 5.6 cm in diameter after 3 years of surveillance, a 79-year-old patient was fitted with a Vanguard modular stent graft and monitored on a regular basis for 6 years. Two years later, the aneurysmal sac ruptured. The patient died 1 month after an open surgery. The device was devoid of any encapsulation and the ipsilateral limb was detached from the body. The Nitinol skeleton was mostly maintained, however, some polypropylene sutures were broken. The resulting motion of the sharp-angled Nitinol wires caused abrasion and resulted in a few localized holes that were sufficient to permit blood to percolate through the textile wall. Some polyester yarns in the warp direction were ruptured. The Nitinol wire used in this device was shown to be corrosion resistant but the selection of the polypropylene suture was inappropriate. Because this technology is maturing rapidly, these weaknesses can be avoided in the future generations of endovascular devices. It is recommended that these Nitinol wires be sutured to the fabric and that polyester yarns stronger than 68 decitex in tubes 8 mm in diameter are selected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical ImplantsSame topicAortic aneurysm repair treatmentsFrench-language works237,207