Implantation of Left Ventricular Assist Device After Descending Aortic Stent Graft for Mural Thrombus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In patients with intraluminal thrombus, commonly applied temporary circulatory support modalities are contraindicated secondary to concern regarding distal or proximal (specifically veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) embolization of the thrombus. Therefore, in patients with cardiogenic shock and synchronous intraluminal descending aortic thrombus, support options are quite limited. We report a case of a 66-year-old man in cardiogenic shock, due to an ischemic cardiomyopathy, who also had intramural thrombus with an intraluminal component in the descending thoracic aorta. An endovascular stent graft was inserted inside the aorta over the location of the mural thrombus. This allowed for the placement of an intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for pre-operative optimization. After 3 days, a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) was implanted via left anterolateral thoracotomy with hemi-sternotomy, and the IABP was removed. Post-operatively, he had a relatively uncomplicated course without signs of embolic phenomena and ultimately was discharged home. Surveillance computed tomography imaging at 6 months showed no endovascular leak or migration of the stent. This case demonstrates the feasibility of aortic stent graft placement to allow safe insertion of an IABP in the setting of aortic mural thrombus. Furthermore, it demonstrates the safety and feasibility of LVAD implantation after recent aortic stent graft placement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".