MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327073184 · doi:10.15836/ccar2016.127

Aortic dissection or coronary artery perforation?

2016· article· en· W2327073184 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lovel Giunio, Ivica Vuković

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiologia Croatica · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRight coronary arteryPerforationAortic dissectionPericardiumPercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCICardiologySurgeryStentDissection (medical)ArteryAortaRadiologyInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionCoronary angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

VII. nacionalni sastanak o kardiovaskularnim intervencijama s međunarodnim sudjelovanjem VI. sastanak intervencijskih kardioloških medicinskih sestara i tehničaraWe present case of coronary artery perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which was misunderstood as aortic dissection.A 73-year-old woman, diabetic, presented with effort angina of Canadian Cardiological Society (CCS) scale III for the last two months.Coronary angiogram revealed multiple significant stenosis of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and the right coronary artery (RCA).After she was presented to heart team and refused surgical revascularization we proceeded with PCI.LAD was successfully treated with one drug eluting stent.After that we proceeded with RCA intervention.After first balloon inflation huge contrast extravasation (4x4cm) was noticed in projection of aortic wall.Patient was stable, procedure was temporary interrupted and because of suspicion on aortic dissection urgent echocardiography and CT scan of aorta was performed.Echocardiography did not show fluid accumulation in pericardium while CT scan excluded aortic dissection and showed perforation of ostial RCA with cranial intrapericardial contrast extravasation.After that procedure was continued with implantation of three DE stents in RCA.Final angiogram showed successful sealing of ruptured ostial RCA without any contrast leak.During the following days there was no evidence of fluid in the pericardium, also MSCT coronarography confirmed normal flow in RCA and LAD.After five days patient was safely discharged from hospital.This case shows well known complication of PCI, coronary artery perforation visualized as direct extravasation of contrast from coronary artery defined by the Ellis criteria from grade I to III. 1 Grade I and II in most cases have less dramatically course while grade III often results in cardiac tamponade.Perforations can be successfully treated by covered or noncovered stents, prolonged balloon inflation, microcoil embolization or surgically.This was perforation grade II but because of direction of contrast leak looked like dissection of ascending aorta.Fortunately, this patient was stable enough to perform CT scan to exclude aortic dissection and finally we were able to successfully treat this complication with stent implantation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiologia CroaticaSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207