MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946844481 · doi:10.1097/gox.0000000000002236

Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters as Potential Risk Factors for Failure in Pedicled Latissimus Dorsi Flaps

2019· article· en· W2946844481 on OpenAlexaff
Johnny Ionut Efanov, Gabriel Bouhadana, Michel Alain Danino

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryLatissimus dorsi muscleThrombosisCatheter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pedicled latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flaps are reliable options for reconstruction of torso and head and neck defects. After ensuring that no kink or external compression occurs on the pedicle, the survival rate exceeds 99%. However, we experienced a complete necrosis of the flap after insertion of a peripherally inserted central catheter line. Intraoperative findings demonstrated thrombosis of the subclavian vein over a large segment, which was found to be the cause of flap failure. The clinical significance of this case report is aimed at raising awareness against insertion of peripherally inserted central catheter lines on the ipsilateral arm of a pedicled latissimus dorsi flap.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Global OpenSame topicReconstructive Surgery and Microvascular TechniquesFrench-language works237,207