Modular Catheter Systems in Minimally Invasive Interventional Medical Procedures: Case Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Medical device catheters that are used in minimally invasive interventional medical procedures all follow the same integrated design and use paradigm. The features and elements of any catheter device are combined in a single unitary construction. A modular approach to the design, construction, and use of these types of interventional catheters may provide significant advantages and benefits not available with an integrated design paradigm. Objective This paper aimed to present the design of a modular catheter system and the findings from an initial veterinary use as a case study for the potential of modular catheter systems in general. Methods A modular catheter system was designed using commercially available angioplasty balloon dilatation catheters as one module in the system and a custom designed scoring adapter as the other module. The scoring adapter incorporates wires to add scoring features to the angioplasty balloon catheter to improve the dilatation performance during a pulmonary valvuloplasty procedure. The scoring adapter also includes a novel attachment mechanism to couple the scoring adapter to any 0.035-inch guidewire–compatible angioplasty balloon catheter. Results The modular catheter system was successfully designed, manufactured, and used in an initial minimally invasive veterinary cardiovascular intervention to treat a case of canine subvalvular pulmonary stenosis. The scoring adapter and angioplasty balloon catheter were successfully combined tableside in the operating room at the time of the procedure and used to successfully dilate the subvalvular obstruction. Conclusions The successful design and use of the presented modular catheter system demonstrates the feasibility and potential advantages of this type of paradigm to enable physicians to create interventional catheter devices at the time of a procedure guided by the procedural needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".