Right ventricular laceration caused by sternal wire fracture following cardiac surgery: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resternotomy for bleeding remains a significant complication with increased rates of morbidity and mortality. Right ventricular laceration from fractured sternal wires is rare cause of postoperative bleeding. A 68-year-old man presented for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Postoperatively, he had a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation. He initially responded to treatment, and shortly after mobilizing, acutely decompensated hemodynamically. A bedside echo revealed significant pericardial effusion. The patient was taken urgently for re-exploration with a diagnosis of cardiac tamponade. All sternal wires were fractured, and a right ventricular laceration was identified. The laceration was repaired, and the patient recovered well postoperatively. Postoperative hemorrhage can occur in cardiac surgical patients, but rarely is the cause laceration secondary to sternal wire fracture. Alternative sternal closure techniques should be considered in this and other high-risk groups of patients. Patients with sternal dehiscence should be monitored closely and definitive management should not be postponed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".