Annual Dialysis Conference February 8‐11, 2020 Kansas City, Missouri
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Irritation of intima by central venous catheters (CVC) leads to fibrous sheathing, stenosis, and decreased blood outflow rate.However, if a catheter were connected "end to side" to a vein, with the tip barely entering the vein, blood removal would be possible without catheter contact and damage to the intima.Aim: We tested the TVA catheter concept in four normal sheep.Methods: Under general anesthesia, a 5 mm OD single-lumen silicone catheter (TVA) was placed into the jugular vein so the tip barely entered the brachiocephalic vein (shown by angiography).A 5 mm diameter OD single-lumen CVC was placed through the opposite jugular vein with tip in the superior vena cava.Catheters had movable Dacron cuffs and were tunneled to skin exit sites.Blood outflow rate was measured under controlled negative pressure (-40 mm Hg) 3 times weekly for 3 weeks.Results: Blood outflow rate in awake, standing sheep was 180-240 ml/min for the TVA, statistically the same as for the CVC.Blood infusion rate was equivalent for TVA and CVC.Post-mortem showed intimal damage to the SVC and jugular veins from the CVC, but no damage in the jugular or brachiocephalic veins from the TVA.Conclusion: In humans a TVA placed through the saphenous vein with tip protruding 1-2 mm into the femoral vein should provide adequate blood removal rate for hemodialysis (250 to 400 ml/min), without damage to the intima of the vein.A standard CVC above the TVA could provide blood return.A multi-centre analysis of arteriovenous fistula survival -India
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.331 | 0.116 |
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".