MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Retrospective analysis of adequacy of hemodialysis using the Cannon catheter (Arrow International)

2005· article· en· W2133482860 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
William DaVanzo

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCatheterHemodialysisDialysisNephrologySurgeryGuidelineFluoroscopyRetrospective cohort studyRenal functionDialysis catheterInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently there is no published data using the Cannon catheter. Our purpose was to confirm adequacy of hemodialysis using the Arrow Cannon catheter. This retrospective study used patients from one nephrology practice, utilizing two dialysis centers. All patients in a two year period meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria referred for tunneled catheter placement were included. All catheters were placed by interventional nephrologist using ultrasound for vein cannulation and fluoroscopy for placement confirmation. Pump speed (Qb), venous and arterial pressures, Kt/V, urea reduction ratio (URR), and dialysis prescriptions/adherence to the prescription were reviewed at baseline and monthly for six months. Catheter removal or six months were the study endpoints. Complications were evaluated from time of insertion throughout the study period. 38 patients were enrolled in the study. All patients were treated in the outpatient setting. Insertion outcome was successful in all 38 patients. The average dialysis prescription was approximately 400 ml/min, 3.7 hours, and 3 days a week. The mean average pump speed for all months evaluated exceeded the K/DOQI guideline of 300 ml/min. by 67.9–101.4 ml/min. The differences were significant with p < 0.01. The mean Kt/V and URR% data for each month evaluated exceeded the K/DOQI guideline values of 1.2 for Kt/V and 63% for URR% by between .34–.24 and 8%–10%, respectively; the differences were all at a significant level with p < 0.01. Mean arterial pressures for all months evaluated ranged from −218.6 to −238.1, and venous pressures averaged between 179.8 to 213.7. Only three patients experienced late complications (all of which were infections) and no patients required hospitalization post complication. Two were bacteremic; the other had tunnel infection without positive blood cultures. This is the first retrospective study to evaluate the adequacy of hemodialysis with the Cannon catheter. Our study showed that flow rates and adequacy of hemodialysis can be reached using the Cannon catheter, with minimal complications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis→French-language works237,207→