MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105266766 · doi:10.1002/ccd.21839

Endovascular balloon occlusion for catheter‐induced large artery perforation in the catheterization laboratory

2009· article· en· W2105266766 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Bernard Masson, Saad Al Bugami, John Webb

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Procedures and Complications
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOcclusionSurgeryBalloonPerforationCatheterRadiologyBalloon catheterComplicationStent

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Vessel perforation is a complication that cannot be completely avoided in the setting of endovascular procedures. When a large noncompressible artery is disrupted, uncontrolled bleeding may lead to hemodynamic collapse. Endovascular occlusion may provide rapid control of hemorrhage and facilitate definitive therapy; yet, occlusion balloons are not commonly utilized in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. METHODS: We describe our experience with the use of dedicated occlusion balloons for the management of catheter-induced major bleeding events. Endovascular occlusion was utilized to control severe bleeding in five patients with perforation of the aorta, iliac, femoral, or pulmonary artery. RESULTS: Acute control of hemorrhage was achieved in all patients with hemodynamic stabilization in four of five cases. Endovascular balloon occlusion facilitated definitive therapy with surgical repair in two patients, covered stent deployment in one patient and transcatheter vessel occlusion in one patient. Care was withdrawn in one elderly patient with multiple comorbidities. All four patients who survived the procedure were discharged alive from the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: In most cases of severe catheter-induced bleeding, endovascular balloon occlusion provide a safe, rapid, and effective means of temporary bleeding control.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicVascular Procedures and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207