Chronic abdominal aortic dissection, endovascular treatment using a new Stent-graft for in situ Fenestration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although endovascular treatment of the thoracic aorta (TEVAR) has become an elective procedure for treatment of complicated type B aortic dissection, its role in treating post dissection thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA), is still limited. This is a case of aortic vascular disease, which reports the use of a new endovascular device. CASE PRESENTATION: We present the case of a 62 year old male patient with a history of hypertension, active smoker, who presented penetrating descending thoracic aortic ulcer in the setting of a chronic abdominal aortic dissection. The patient was treated using a new stent graft capable of in situ fenestration that allowed crossing the stent-graft membrane, implanting a covered stent to exclude the re-entry at the level of the left renal artery and redirecting the blood flow through the true lumen. CONCLUSIONS: This case report demonstrates the feasibility of a novel stent-graft concept. Larger studies with longer follow-up are essential to fully evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this new design.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".