MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157098323 · doi:10.1067/mhn.2002.129818

Management of Aberrant Internal Carotid Artery Injury: A Real Emergency

2002· article· en· W2157098323 on OpenAlexaff
Rajan Jain, Thomas R. Marotta, Gary Redekop, D. W. Anderson Vancouver

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePseudoaneurysmInternal carotid arterySurgeryDissection (medical)Middle earIatrogenic injuryFistulaBluntRadiologyPenetrating traumaAneurysm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carotid artery pseudoaneurysm or fistula formation can occur due to spontaneous dissection, blunt or penetrating trauma, or iatrogenic injury. Most of the iatrogenic injuries in the petrous region occur during middle ear operations in patients with an aberrant internal carotid artery (ICA). Aberrant ICA is a rare anomaly that can be associated with life‐threatening aural hemorrhage if inadvertently injured during middle ear surgery. Other causes of unexpected hemorrhage during or after middle ear surgery include high jugular bulb, aneurysm, and glomus tumor. The management of aberrant ICA injury has always been a challenging task because of the difficult surgical approach. With major advances in the neuroendovascular field, endovascular treatment of these lesions can be quick and effective. We discuss here a case of endovascular management of an aberrant ICA that was probably injured during previous middle ear operations that led to pseudoaneurysm formation and ruptured subsequent to ear infection and drainage.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtolaryngologySame topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207