MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895733934 · doi:10.1002/ccd.27846

Transradial left gastric artery embolization to treat severe obesity: A pilot study

2018· article· en· W2895733934 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Pirlet, Zoltán Ruzsa, Olivier Costerousse, Balázs Nemes, Béla Merkely, Paul Poirier, Olivier F. Bertrand

Bibliographic record

VenueCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeft gastric arterySurgeryBody mass indexEmbolizationPercutaneousWeight lossFluoroscopyConventional PCIRadiologyObesityArteryInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is currently the only effective treatment with long-lasting results to treat severe obesity. OBJECTIVES: We performed a pilot study to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of percutaneous distal embolization of the left gastric artery (LGA) using a transradial approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: . We successfully injected 300-500 μm polyvinyl alcohol particles using 5Fr catheters and all distal LGA were occluded at the end of procedures. Mean procedure duration was 24 ± 13 min and mean fluoroscopy time was 10 ± 5 min. Six patients reported mild transient epigastric discomfort, which resolved with proton pump inhibitors. At 2 months, the average weight loss was of 7 ± 6 kg (median loss: -10 kg [-2, -11]), 6 ± 12 kg (median loss: -9 kg [-16, +4]) at 6 months and 13 ± 17 kg (median loss: -11 kg [0, -25]) up to 12 months after index procedures. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous transradial LGA embolization appears to be a promising technique to reduce the obesity burden. Randomized trials are required to further delineate the risk/benefit ratio, potential clinical indications and long term results.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.448
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatheterization and Cardiovascular InterventionsSame topicCardiac Arrhythmias and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207