Incidental Finding of Thoracic Aortic Dissection in a Patient Post-Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thoracic aortic dissection (TAD) is an uncommon but potentially fatal complication of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Most patients present to the emergency room with severe chest pain, shortness of breath, or after a syncopal episode. Asymptomatic patients pose a challenge to diagnosis. The authors present a case of an 82-year-old male, who was found to have an incidental finding of a 5-cm ascending aortic aneurysm with an intimal dissection flap four months after CABG. Extensive workup on possible risk factors such as underlying aortic diseases, genetic conditions, and hypertensive crisis proved noncontributory. Aggressive blood pressure control was achieved, and the patient was observed in the intensive care unit before discharge with follow-up. The purpose of this case report is to alert clinicians of TAD after CABG and highlight the importance of developing a protocol for follow-up and monitoring of patients who have undergone CABG, as complications can be asymptomatic. Early and accurate diagnosis of TAD as a complication of CABG is essential to improving survival rates.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".