Percutaneous Intracardiac Mass Extraction in High Surgical-Risk Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large intracardiac masses including tumors, thrombi, and vegetations result in detrimental embolic or obstructive sequelae and present a management dilemma. Open heart surgery, the traditional approach, may not be an option for many patients with a prohibitive surgical risk due to multiple comorbidities. Recently, percutaneous options have emerged with reported success in extracting such intracardiac masses. A 42-year-old female with history of advanced primary sclerosing cholangitis with decompensated liver cirrhosis causing ascites and variceal bleed presented to the emergency department with fatigue, subjective fevers, chills and melena. Laboratory results revealed neutrophil-predominant leukocytosis and normocytic anemia, and blood cultures were positive for Candida albicans . Electrocardiography showed sinus tachycardia. Chest X-ray was unremarkable. She underwent packed red blood cell transfusion and esophageal banding for variceal bleeding. Transthoracic echocardiogram revealed normal left ventricular ejection fraction and no wall motion abnormalities. A right atrial mobile mass measuring approximately 1.0 × 3.0 cm was noted. Multidisciplinary heart team discussion concluded that while the mass posed a high embolic risk, the patient had a prohibitive risk for surgical intervention. Successful percutaneous removal of the mass using Penumbra system device (Penumbra Incorporated, Alameda, CA) was accomplished. This case report details the procedure and outcomes, as well as presents a literature review. J Med Cases. 2023;14(11):362-368 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc4150
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".