Presentation and management of delayed aortic endograft infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A man in his 60s who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm 4 years ago presents with 1 week of abdominal pain, fever and leucocytosis. CT angiogram demonstrated an enlarged aneurysm sac with intraluminal gas and periaortic stranding consistent with infected EVAR. He was clinically unfit for an open surgical intervention due to his significant cardiac comorbidities, including hypertension, dyslipidaemia, type 2 diabetes, recent coronary artery bypass grafting and congestive heart failure secondary to ischaemic cardiomyopathy with an ejection fraction of 30%. Therefore, due to this significant surgical risk, he was treated with percutaneous drainage for the aortic collection and lifelong antibiotics. The patient is well 8 months following presentation with no signs of ongoing endograft infection, residual aneurysm sac enlargement, endoleak or haemodynamic instability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".