All that glitters: case presentation and review of radial access complications in neurointervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radial artery access has experienced increasing adoption and rapid expansion of indications for neurointerventional procedures. This access is an attractive neurointervention route to be considered, with many advantages over the traditional femoral access in terms of ease of vasculature navigation and decreased risk of complications such as significant bleeding. Although a promising technique for neurointerventional procedures, there are inherent and unique considerations as well as potential complications involved. The following case report highlights some of these vital concepts associated with radial artery access, including appropriate patient selection as well as assessment of arterial size in the context of neurointerventional techniques. Early identification of complications such as arterial injury and compartment syndrome, with an emphasis on appropriate draping and inter-procedure monitoring, is discussed as well as approaches for subsequent management. Finally, the issue of radiation safety in this emerging technique is considered. These concepts are critical for the successful use and the continued growth of radial artery access for neurointervention procedures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".