Anatomical advantage to percutaneous insertion of the intra-aortic balloon through the left brachial artery over the right brachial artery.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Off-label use of the intra-aortic balloon (IAB) is not recommended in ideal situations and certainly not a Food and Drug Administration-approved activity. The instruction-for-use manual for the IAB recommends percutaneous insertion. However, there are certain extreme situations where "thinking outside the box" appears necessary. We have successfully inserted a transthoracic IAB (TIAB) in the operating room where an open sternum is an option. This has been instituted whenever severe peripheral vascular disease (PVD) precludes a percutaneous attempt or when attempted insertion fails. An open chest is not a choice in the catheterization laboratory or the postoperative setting. We have successfully inserted the IAB through the brachiall axillary artery in a patient with bilateral aortofemoral grafts, with a history of severe PVD, in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. A left-sided approach is advisable for brachial artery insertion and an axillary approach is also possible under sedation. This case report details our experience with transbrachial insertion of the IAB and establishes counterpulsation through this route as a viable option, where an open chest is not available and a percutaneous femoral approach has failed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".