An Uncommon Presentation of Acute Thoracic Aortic Dissection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a case of a 40-year-old Caucasian male with past medical history of polysubstance abuse (cocaine and methamphetamine), who presented to the emergency department (ED) complaining of intermittent cough with associated chest discomfort and shortness of breath for 2 weeks. Initial vital signs demonstrated borderline tachycardia (98 beats per minute), tachypnea (37 times per minutes), and hypoxia (oxygen saturation 89% on room air), and his physical exam was grossly unremarkable. A preliminary workup including a computed tomography angiography (CTA) revealed a type A aortic dissection with both thoracic and abdominal involvement for which the patient was admitted. This patient had resection of the ascending aorta with graft placement, cardiopulmonary bypass, aortic root replacement using composite prosthesis and left and right coronary reconstruction and reimplantation and survived a complicated hospital course. This case demonstrates the classic association known to exist between recreational drug use, specifically stimulants such as cocaine and amphetamines, and acute aortic dissection (AAD). However, such a presentation of borderline subacute, painless dissection in the setting of polysubstance use raises further questions, since uncommon AAD is typically found in higher-risk populations such as those with connective tissue disorders (Marfan syndrome, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, Loeys-Dietz syndrome), bicuspid aortic valve, chronic hypertension, or previous aortic pathology. We therefore suggest clinicians strongly consider uncommon AAD as part of their differential diagnosis in patients with known or highly suspected polysubstance abuse.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".