The evaluation of the postoperative course in patients operated due to abdominal aortic aneurysm as urgent or elective procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The patients with the aortic abdominal aneurysm of 55mm in diameter are qualified for surgery. There is open repair (OR) by means of the vascular prosthesis implantation or the less invasive endovascular method by means of the stent graft implantation through femoral arteries incision (EndovascularAorticRepair - EVAR). The aim of the study was the evaluation of the postoperative course in patients operated due to the aortic abdominal aneurysm and the evaluation of the impact of the surgical method on the short-time results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 124 patients operated due to the abdominal aortic aneurysm in Dept of Surgery of 4th Military Hospital in Wroclaw in 2014 were enrolled into the study: 53 patients with OR, 53 patients with EVAR, and 19 patients with a ruptured aneurysm. RESULTS: Mortality was 0% in EVAR and 6% in OR and 39% in a ruptured aneurysm. Time of hospital stay was 5.8 days in EVAR vs 10 days in OR. The stay in ICU was 0% in EVAR vs 13% in OR. Blood transfusion was 9.4% in EVAR vs 66% in OR. Time of postoperative analgesia was 27 h in EVAR vs 76.8 h in OR. Cardio-respiratory decompensation was 1.9% in EVAR vs 7.6% in OR. Renal insufficiency was 2% in EVAR vs 9% in OR. The lower rate of organ complications was in EVAR. The ruptured aneurysm presented the most complicated postoperative course: hospital stay of 11.4 days, ICU stay of 78%, blood transfusion of 100%, painkillers of 136 hours, cardio-respiratory decompensation of 81% and renal insufficiency of 69%. CONCLUSIONS: The method of treatment, the conditions of the admission and the type of surgery influenced the postoperative course. The elective EVAR patients presented both the 0% of mortality and the lightest postoperative course. The ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms operated as an emergency had the most complicated postoperative course.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".