Maintenance of blood flow rate on dialysis with self‐centering CentrosFLO catheter: A multicenter prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Chronic central venous catheters (CVC) for dialysis lose patency and deliver lower blood flow over time, often due to fibrous sheathing that covers the lumen tips. The CentrosFLO central venous catheter has a shape that directs the arterial and venous tips away from the walls of the vena cava and right atrium, making sheathing of the tips less likely. Methods A prospective, multicenter, single arm, non-controlled, observational study was conducted at eight sites in the United States. All consenting dialysis patients receiving CentrosFLO catheters through the right or left internal jugular veins were accepted in the study, as long as the catheter was expected to be used for 45 days and was not an over-the-wire replacement for a previous CVC. Data were automatically collected on initial and average dialysis blood flow rate and initial arterial and venous pressures, for up to 26 weeks of dialysis therapy. Findings 75 patients were enrolled. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that 87% of patients maintained blood flow rate over 300 mL/min throughout 26 weeks of follow-up. There was no decline in average dialysis blood flow rate and no significant change in hydraulic resistance of the arterial or venous lumens of the catheters during the study. Discussion The CentrosFLO catheter demonstrates long term patency with good flow rates on dialysis, which, by comparison with previous studies, shows a clinically significant improvement in blood flow rate vs. other catheters. Stable hydraulic resistance of the catheter lumens showed no evidence of tip encroachment by fibrous sheaths.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".