MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

322 THE TRIALS AND TRIBULATIONS OF ADRENAL VEIN ALDOSTERONE SAMPLING

2012· article· en· W2322756587 on OpenAlexaff
J.M.U.U.K. Jayasinghe, Rosario Rebello

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAldosteroneHyperaldosteronismPrimary aldosteronismAdrenalectomyInferior vena cavaVeinSurgeryAdrenal glandRenal veinUrologyRadiologyInternal medicineKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The objective of this study was to determine the success rate of adrenal vein aldosterone sampling(AVS) on patients with documented primary hyperaldosteronism. Methods: From October, 2005 to April, 2011 forty cases of adrenal vein aldosterone sampling were reviewed for success in accessing the adrenal veins. Blood was obtained from both adrenal veins and the inferior vena cava (IVC). The concentrations of aldosterone and cortisol were then measured. AVS was considered successful if the plasma level of cortisol in the adrenal vein was more than 10 times higher than that in the IVC (Funder et al, 2008). Results: A total of 40 cases were reviewed with 18 (45%) cases being successful in accessing both adrenal veins. Twenty-two (55%) of the cases had adrenal adenomas. Within the 18 successful cases 5(12.5%) had the AVS repeated. Nine (50%) of the successful cases went on to have an adrenalectomy. There was 1 successful case that had a complication of bleeding into the right adrenal gland. The success rate of the two designated interventional radiologists was 61% and 20%. Conclusions: On the basis of CT results alone 22 (55%) of the subjects would have been candidates for an adrenalectomy. Although the success rate for AVS was 45%, this success rate resulted in 18% of the subjects not inappropriately undergoing surgical intervention to treat their primary hyperaldosteronism. Although the overall success rate is less than 50%, the complication rate was low (2.5%). The skill of the interventional radiologist is key to successful AVS. References: Funder JW, Carey RM, Fardella C, Gomea-Sanchez CE, Mantero F, Stowasser M,Young Jr. WF, Montori V. Case detection, diagnosis, and treatment of patients with primary aldosteronism: an endocrine society practice guideline. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 2008; 93:9:3266-3281. Mattsson C & Young Jr. WM. Primary aldosteronism: diagnostic and treatment strategies. Nature Clinical Practice Nephrology 2006;2:4:198-208. Rossi GP, Pessina AC, Heagerty AM. Primary aldosteronism: an update on screening, diagnosis and treatment. Journal of Hypertension 2008;26:4:613-621. Stewart PM & Allolio B. Adrenal vein sampling for primary Aldosteronism: time for a reality check. Clinical Endocrinology 2010;72:146-148. Young Jr. WF, Stanson AW, Thompson GB, Grant CS, Farley DR, van Heerden JA. Role for adrenal venous sampling in primary aldosteronism. Surgery 2004;136:6:1227-1235. Young Jr. WF & Stanson AW. What are the keys to successful adrenal venous sampling (AVS) in patients with primary aldosteronism? Clinical Endocrinology 2009;70:14-17.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.269
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.096 · 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207