MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207637372 · doi:10.52768/2766-7820/1128

Intra-cardiac cement embolism during hip arthroplasty

2021· article· en· W3207637372 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Amir, David Bracco, Gabriele Baldini, André Denault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Images and Medical Case Reports · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEmbolusCardiologyAtrial fibrillationEmbolismAscending aortaEmbolizationHemodynamicsCoronary artery diseaseSurgeryInternal medicineAnesthesiaAorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 92-year-old woman presented to the operating room with a right femoral neck fracture. She had a past medical history significant for atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease with a history of coronary bypass, severely stenotic aortic valve (area 0.9 cm2), diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension and dementia. She underwent general anesthesia with continuous Transesophageal Echocardiographic (TEE) monitoring for a right hemi-arthroplasty. While cementing the prosthesis, small cement emboli were initially seen (ME ascending aorta SAX view) migrating in the pulmonary artery (Figure A*). Subsequently, a large (4 cm) cement embolus was visualized in the right atrium, adhered to the Eustachian valve, an embryonic remnant (Figure B*, supplementary video A). The patient experienced no significant hemodynamic compromise or issue with gas exchange. Given embolization risk and severe potential for harm, intervention may be indicated. Treatment options were discussed but given hemodynamic stability, patient age and comorbidities, the patient was monitored without further intervention.

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)0.003
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
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Images and Medical Case ReportsSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207