MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132185981 · doi:10.1517/14656566.3.4.411

Treatment options for renovascular hypertension

2002· review· en· W2132185981 on OpenAlex
J. David Spence

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenovascular hypertensionRenal artery stenosisCardiologyInternal medicineAngioplastyBlood pressureRenal arteryPathophysiology of hypertensionStenosisKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Renovascular hypertension is usually caused by atherosclerotic narrowing of the origin of the renal artery and is much more common than is thought among patients with peripheral vascular disease, carotid stenosis or heart failure. Renovascular hypertension must be distinguished from renal artery stenosis. In true renovascular hypertension, the kidney takes charge of the blood pressure and will do what it takes to push blood pressure high enough to force blood through the blocked artery. This can be diagnosed with functional tests that measure glomerular filtration rate before and after blockade of the renin-angiotensin system with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or antagonists of the AT(1) subtype of the angiotensin receptor. There is insufficient data on which to make evidence-based recommendations on the management of renovascular hypertension. Only two randomised trials exist of angioplasty versus medical therapy and of these the larger was severely contaminated by angioplasty among the group initially assigned to medical therapy. Only one trial exists of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibition versus alternative medical therapy. The drugs that are most effective in medical management of renovascular hypertension--angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor-1 blockers--tend to be avoided because of fear of a very rare complication (acute renal failure in patients with severe stenosis of both renal arteries, or the artery to a single remaining kidney). This fear is misplaced not only because it is rare (< 5% of patients with renovascular hypertension) but because it is reversible and treatable by revascularisation. Patients with renovascular hypertension should be evaluated by nuclear medicine differential glomerular filtration rate, enhanced by blockers of the renin-angiotensin system. If medical therapy is ineffective or causes severe impairment of renal function, revascularisation is required. Some experts favour surgical revascularisation because of occasional angioplasty failure and the risk of deterioration of renal function after angioplasty.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.284
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.181 · 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