MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3179202544 · doi:10.1111/jch.14318

Page kidney: Rare cause of acute kidney injury after complicated renal artery angioplasty

2021· article· en· W3179202544 on OpenAlexaff
Adrianna Douvris, Januvi Jegatheswaran, Adnan Hadziomerovic, Marcel Ruzicka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRenal artery stenosisAngioplastyRenal arteryRevascularizationStenosisAcute kidney injuryKidneyComplicationHematomaRenovascular hypertensionSurgerySecondary hypertensionRenal Artery ObstructionRadiologyInternal medicineCardiologyBlood pressureMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors present a case of a patient who experienced a rare complication after attempted renal angioplasty and stenting, Page kidney. This patient presented with new onset hypertension secondary to bilateral renal artery stenosis and was referred for revascularization given hypertension refractory to medical management. The right renal artery underwent successful angioplasty and stenting; however, the left renal artery experienced recoil stenosis. Post-procedure the patient developed acute kidney injury secondary to Page kidney from subcapsular and extracapsular hematoma. This was managed conservatively with transfusions and the hematoma and acute kidney injury self-resolved over the next 4 months. This case highlights the importance of revascularization for refractory hypertension secondary to hemodynamically significant bilateral renal artery stenosis, the rare complication of Page kidney with attempted revascularization of renal artery stenosis and the involvement of a hypertension specialist in the decision of revascularization of renal artery stenosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical HypertensionSame topicRenal and Vascular PathologiesFrench-language works237,207