MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387393384 · doi:10.1111/hdi.13117

Comparison of supraclavicular brachiocephalic and femoral vein approaches for tunneled dialysis catheter placement in patients with thrombosed internal jugular veins

2023· article· en· W4387393384 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Umut Öğüşlü, Burçak Gümüş, Murat Yalçin, Osman Zikrullah Şahin, G. Yilmaz

Bibliographic record

VenueHemodialysis International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBrachiocephalic veinInternal jugular veinSurgeryCatheterThrombosisFemoral veinVeinSubclavian veinDialysis catheterAxillary veinJugular veinDialysisSuperior vena cava

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: There is still debate on the best access route in case of bilateral internal jugular vein thrombosis. We aimed to compare the safety, effectiveness, and outcomes of tunneled dialysis catheter placement via supraclavicular brachiocephalic and femoral vein approaches in patients with bilateral internal jugular vein thrombosis. METHODS: Between January 2018 and December 2021, data of the patients in whom tunneled dialysis catheters were placed via the supraclavicular brachiocephalic vein (n = 42) and femoral vein (n = 57) approaches were extracted. Patient demographics, technical and clinical success rates, complications, and outcomes were noted. The Likert scale was used to assess patient satisfaction. FINDINGS: Forty two (42.4%) patients were men, and the mean age was 61.9 (range, 12-93) years. The technical and clinical success rate was 100% for both groups. No major complication was encountered. The mean follow-up period was 497.5 (range, 32-1698) catheter days. Thirty-day patency was similar for the brachiocephalic vein and femoral vein group (40 [95.2%] vs. 55 [96.5%], p = 0.754). Also, primary and cumulative patency rates were comparable (p = 0.158; p = 0.660). The infection rate was 2.6 and 4.1 per 1000 catheter days for the brachiocephalic vein and femoral vein group. The infection-free survival was significantly higher in the brachiocephalic vein group (71.9% vs. 35.3% at 12 months, p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was higher in the brachiocephalic vein group (median satisfaction, 5 vs. 4, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Both supraclavicular brachiocephalic vein and femoral vein approaches have high technical and clinical success with comparable patency rates. However, low infection rate and high patient satisfaction make the supraclavicular brachiocephalic vein approach a reasonable alternative before proceeding to the femoral vein access.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHemodialysis International→Same topicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis→French-language works237,207→