Repeat Adrenal Vein Sampling in Aldosteronism: Reproducibility and Interpretation of Persistently Discordant Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The reproducibility of adrenal vein sampling (AVS) is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This work aimed to determine reproducibility of biochemical results and diagnostic lateralization in patients undergoing repeat AVS. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of single-center, single-operator AVS procedures at a tertiary care center. Included were patients with confirmed primary aldosteronism (PA) undergoing repeat AVS because of concerns about technical success or discordant diagnostic results. Simultaneous AVS was performed by an experienced operator using a consistent protocol of precosyntropin and postcosyntropin infusion. Among successfully catheterized adrenal veins (selectivity index ≥ 2), the correlation of the adrenalaldosterone/cortisol (A/C) ratio was measured between the first and second AVS. The secondary outcome measure was diagnostic agreement on repeat AVS lateralization (lateralization index ≥ 3). RESULTS: There were 46 sets of AVS from 23 patients at a median of 3 months apart. There was moderate correlation in A/C ratios in the adrenal veins and inferior vena cava (Spearman r = 0.49-0.59, P < .05) pre cosyntropin. Post cosyntropin, the correlation was better (Spearman r = 0.67-0.76, P < .05). In technically successful AVS, there was moderate correlation between the repeated lateralization indices (Spearman r = 0.53, P < .05). In 15 patients in whom repeat AVS was performed because of apparent lateralization discordance with computed tomography imaging, the final diagnosis was the same in the second AVS procedure. Initial failed AVS was successful 75% of the time on repeat attempt. CONCLUSION: Repeat AVS was feasible and usually successful when an initial attempt failed. There was modest correlation between individual repeat adrenal A/C ratios and lateralization indices when AVS was performed twice. The final lateralization diagnosis was identical in all cases. This demonstrates that AVS is a reliable and reproducible localizing test in PA.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".