MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2498685752 · doi:10.1136/tsaco-2016-000012

New device for temporary hemorrhage control in penetrating injuries to the ventricles

2016· article· en· W2498685752 on OpenAlexaff
João Rezende-Neto, Howard Leong‐Poi, Sandro Rizoli, Andrew Beckett

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma Surgery & Acute Care Open · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma Management and Diagnosis
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVentricleFoley catheterSurgeryStroke volumeFoleyAnesthesiaFibrous jointHeart RuptureCatheterEjection fractionCardiologyHeart failureComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The best way to control hemorrhage from cardiac injuries is through digital occlusion followed by suture. However, this is difficult to accomplish in the emergency department (ED) setting. Generally, temporary control is obtained in advance of definitive treatment in the operating room. Despite safety and efficacy concerns, balloon Foley catheter insertion through the injury is still an option following ED thoracotomies. We developed a new device for temporary hemorrhage control in cardiac injuries and compared it to the Foley. METHODS: 6 adult swine (n=6) underwent full-thickness (1.5 cm) injury along the longitudinal axis of the right ventricle (RV). After 5 s of bleeding, hemorrhage control was attempted with either the device or the Foley, and blood loss quantified. Subsequently, the wound was sutured and mean arterial pressure was restored to baseline with lactated Ringer's infusion. Subsequently, another injury 2 cm apart in the same ventricle was managed with apparatus not employed in the first injury. The same followed in the LV totaling 4 injuries per animal, 2 in each ventricle. Intraoperative echocardiogram, laboratory test and final wound sizes assessed. RESULTS: The device resulted in less bleeding than the Foley; RV 58.7±11.3 vs 147.7±30.9 mL, LV 81.7±11.9 vs 187.5±40.3 mL (p<0.05). Percent change in tricuspid regurgitation was less with the device than FO, 66.6% vs 400%. Mitral regurgitation increased 16% with Foley, but remained unchanged with the device. Changes in stroke volume and LV ejection fraction were less with the device than with Foley; SV 2.09% vs 12.48%, left ventricular ejection fraction 0.46% vs 5.45%. Foley insertion enlarged the wounds. Platelet count, complete blood count, prothrombin time, activated prothrombin time and fibrinogen decreased, whereas troponin and lactate increased compared with baseline, underscoring the magnitude of shock. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac hemorrhage was effectively controlled with the new device. The low-profile collapsible blocking membrane interfered less with cardiac function than did the balloon of the Foley, an important asset in the context of shock.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.274 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrauma Surgery & Acute Care OpenSame topicTrauma Management and DiagnosisFrench-language works237,207