Subsequent Pregnancy in a Patient With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an exceedingly rare condition that primarily affects women in late pregnancy and post partum period. While rare, the mortality in the acute episode may approach 38%. In the literature there are several reports of SCAD in pregnancy and the post partum period but none describe the management of such patients in a subsequent pregnancy. We report a case of SCAD in the post partum period requiring coronary intervention with placement of four stents. The patient presents for prenatal care for a subsequent unplanned but desired pregnancy. Multidisciplinary care was instituted, including close cardiology follow-up. She remained asymptomatic throughout the pregnancy and post partum period. SCAD as a rare cause of acute coronary syndrome carries a significant mortality especially if there is a delay in diagnosis, and management. It should be an important part of the differential diagnoses for a clinician working up a female patient with chest pain in late pregnancy and post partum period. While our patient had a favorable outcome during the subsequent pregnancy, delivery and post partum periods, close follow-up and co-management with cardiology is important in the care of such patients. Given the lack of available clinical information, management recommendations are suggested using expert opinion and tangential data. J Clin Gynecol Obstet. 2015;4(1):177-178 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jcgo244w
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".