MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898899457 · doi:10.21037/cdt.2018.10.11

Cutting balloon angioplasty for treatment of spontaneous coronary artery dissection: case report, literature review, and recommended technical approaches

2019· article· en· W2898899457 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony Main, William Lombardi, Jacqueline Saw

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of CalgaryFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAngioplastyScadArtery dissectionBalloonLumen (anatomy)Dissection (medical)Conventional PCICutting balloonPercutaneous coronary interventionBleedRadiologyArteryHematomaSurgeryCardiologyStentCoronary angiographyRestenosisMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservative therapy is typically recommended for patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD). However, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may have to be pursued in cases of ongoing ischemia or hemodynamic instability. There is early and increasing interest in using cutting balloon (CB) angioplasty to fenestrate the false lumen to allow communication and back-bleed of intramural hematoma into the true lumen. We report a successful case of CB angioplasty for SCAD without the need for stenting, and provide a review of the published experience and recommendation for technical approaches with this strategy.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular Diagnosis and TherapySame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207