Distal transradial access for targeted spinal angiography and embolization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal catheter angiography is commonly performed in the evaluation and treatment of spinal vascular lesions. The typical approach to spinal angiography consists of access through the femoral artery with the use of suitably shaped catheters for selective catheterization of the spinal segmental vasculature. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of distal transradial access through the "anatomical snuffbox" for targeted spinal angiography, for the investigation and treatment of selected spinal lesions. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent transradial spinal angiography and embolization was performed from August 2019 to January 2022. A total of eight patients were identified, who underwent targeted spinal angiography through distal transradial access. Outcome measures were documented in a tabular manner. RESULTS: Radial access was successful in all patients. Seven patients had vascular tumors of the spinal column and underwent tumor embolization followed by segmental artery occlusion prior to surgery. One patient had a spinal dural AV fistula that could not be embolized due to feeding vessel tortuosity and eventually went on to have a laminectomy. Mean fluoroscopy time was 31.4 min. There were no access site hemorrhagic complications. One patient experienced transient mild hand numbness during the period of hemostasis with the vascular compression device that resolved completely within 24 h. CONCLUSIONS: Distal transradial access is a feasible and safe option for targeted spinal angiography and treatment in selected patients.
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".