MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2436549681 · doi:10.1155/2016/6353471

Arteriovenous Fistula Embolization in Suspected Parauterine Choriocarcinoma

2016· article· en· W2436549681 on OpenAlexaff
Husain Alturkistani, Mohamed-Karji Almarzooqi, Vincent L. Oliva, Patrick Gilbert

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Reports in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Trophoblastic Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmbolizationRadiologyChoriocarcinomaPirarubicinChemotherapyArteriovenous fistulaForamen ovale (heart)Ovarian veinSurgeryPatent foramen ovaleOvaryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a case of choriocarcinoma that did not regress after chemotherapy treatment. A 30-year-old female patient (gravida 2, para 2), presented to our ER with stroke and persistent mild pelvic pain 2 months after a Caesarean section. Computed tomography (CT) revealed an ischemic left hemicerebellar region and a hypervascular mass in the pelvic region. This mass was not present on routine fetal ultrasound during pregnancy. The lesion was treated by chemotherapy after closure of a foramen ovale and insertion of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter. After that, 2 courses of EMACO (Etoposide, Methotrexate, Actinomycin D, Cyclophosphamide, and Vincristine) chemotherapy regimen were given. Posttreatment CT showed the hypervascular mass without any changes. Arteriography showed the arteriovenous fistulae that were embolized successfully with plugs, coils, and glue. Embolization was considered due to the risk of acute hemorrhagic life-threatening complications. Eight chemotherapy courses were added after embolization. Treatment by endovascular approach and reduction of the hypervascular mass can be a valuable adjunct to chemotherapy treatment of choriocarcinoma.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Reports in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicGestational Trophoblastic Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207