Survival Post Surgery for Malignant Pericardial Effusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study reviews the survival of patients with malignant pericardial effusion treated with a subxiphoid pericardial window. The medical records of 60 consecutive patients diagnosed with a malignant pericardial effusion and treated with a subxiphoid pericardial window between 1994 and 2008 were reviewed. 72% had lung cancer. Overall 30-day mortality was 31%. Survival rates at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years were 45%, 28%, 17%, and 9%, respectively. Overall median survival was 2.6 months. Patients with malignant pericardial effusion, especially those with primary lung cancer have poor survival rates. In advanced malignancy, the subxiphoid pericardial window procedure provides only short-term palliation of symptoms, and has no effect on long-term survival. The use of any surgical procedure in patients with malignant advanced pericardial effusion should be considered along with non-surgical options on a case-by-case basis depending on symptoms, general status, and expected survival.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".