MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202927583 · doi:10.14740/jmc3754

Iatrogenic Arteriovenous Fistula Secondary to Coronary Artery Dissection Caused by Contrast Injection Into a Chronically Occluded Right Coronary Artery

2021· article· en· W3202927583 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benjamin Fogelson, Hassan Tahir, James Livesay, Raj Baljepally

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Artery Anomalies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyArteriovenous fistulaRight coronary arteryInternal medicinePercutaneous coronary interventionArteryFistulaGreat cardiac veinRadiologyVeinDissection (medical)Coronary arteriesCoronary angiographyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary arteriovenous fistulas and coronary cameral fistulas are rare anomalies that involve the abnormal communication between a coronary artery and a venous structure, such as a coronary vein or a right-sided cardiac chamber. Iatrogenic coronary arteriovenous fistulas and coronary cameral fistulas can be uncommon complications of coronary artery angiography and intervention. Acquired coronary arteriovenous fistulas that develop during percutaneous coronary intervention of chronic total occlusions have been previously reported in the literature. However, a coronary arteriovenous fistula resulting from contrast injection into a chronically and totally occluded right coronary artery during diagnostic coronary angiography is very rare. We present a unique case of a contrast-induced iatrogenic right coronary dissection leading to a coronary arteriovenous fistula communicating to the right atrium through the middle cardiac vein.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicCoronary Artery AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207