MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796781527 · doi:10.1177/0267659118766434

Use of a tracheal dilator for percutaneous insertion of 27F and 31F Avalon <sup>©</sup> dual-lumen cannulae for veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in adults

2018· article· en· W2796781527 on OpenAlexaff
Yiorgos Alexandros Cavayas, Caroline Sampson, Hakeem Yusuff, Richard Porter, Susan Dashey, Chris Harvey

Bibliographic record

VenuePerfusion · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCannulaDilatorPercutaneousLumen (anatomy)Extracorporeal membrane oxygenationSurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation can be performed either by two cannulae or by a single dual-lumen cannula. The dual-lumen cannulation configuration offers multiple advantages: it avoids the femoral site which may be at greater risk of infection, it improves patient mobility, eases prone positioning and greatly reduces recirculation. The Avalon was the first commercially available dual-lumen cannula for adults. It has gained much popularity, but, for more than a year now, the adult vascular access kit with the 30Fr dilator has been discontinued in the United Kingdom. In this article, we share our experience with an alternative insertion method, using a percutaneous dilatational tracheostomy kit. This off-label use of the tracheostomy dilator appears to be safe. It may allow the continuing use of Avalon dual-lumen cannulae while waiting for a more permanent solution to be provided by the manufacturer.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerfusionSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207