Rupture of a Type B Aortic Dissection in a Postpartum Patient with Marfan Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Pregnant women with Marfan syndrome (MFS) are known to be at increased risk of aortic dissection; however, cases of aortic rupture are extremely rare. There is lack of consensus on the exact site and size of aortic diameter measurement that increases this risk, and whether this applies to both Type A and Type B dissections. Case A 23-year-old G2P1001 with known Marfan syndrome who underwent an uncomplicated antepartum and intrapartum course. She experienced persistent backache 10 days postpartum that led to the diagnosis of Stanford Type B dissection. The patient was hospitalized for close observation. Dissection progressed to aortic rupture within 24 hours that required emergent thoracic endovascular aortic repair. She had an uncomplicated postoperative course. Conclusion Our report demonstrates rupture of a known aortic dissection within a very short time in the postpartum period. The case highlights the importance of patient education and close surveillance especially in the postpartum period. It also brings home the value of imaging of the whole aorta rather than focusing on the ascending alone. Multidisciplinary care and timely diagnosis and intervention likely led to the favorable outcome in our case.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".