In Vivo Antegrade Fenestration of Abdominal Aortic Stent-Grafts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine in a canine model the feasibility of antegrade fenestration of abdominal aortic stent-grafts to preserve the patency of the renal arteries. METHODS: Two large dogs underwent antegrade fenestration of stent-grafts in the perirenal aorta. Before fenestration, bare stents were inserted in both renal arteries as fluoroscopic landmarks. A 12-mm iliac extension served as the canine aortic endograft. The first procedure was done under ultrasound and fluoroscopic guidance, using an intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) probe inserted in the vena cava and a Pioneer IVUS catheter. The second was performed exclusively under fluoroscopic guidance with a Brockenbrough needle. Angiograms and duplex ultrasound were planned for 1 month, after which the dogs would be sacrificed for autopsy. The explanted endograft was subjected to biomaterials analysis, with a focus on fabric tear. RESULTS: Perforation of the aortic graft and catheterization of the renal arteries with a floppy guidewire were possible in both animals. In dog 1, aortic graft dilation and subsequent fenestration were not possible, and the experiment was terminated. However, the procedure was successful in both renal arteries of dog 2. At 1-month follow-up in this dog, both renal arteries were patent. Stent fractures were observed bilaterally. There was no extension of the damage to the fabric beyond the area of fenestration. CONCLUSION: In vivo antegrade fenestration of aortic endografts is technically feasible. However, improvements in technique, instrumentation, and materials are required to make it a reliable and reproducible way of allowing stent-graft vascularization of aortic side branches.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".