MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396996551 · doi:10.1681/asn.20203110s1427c

Fluoroscopic-Guided Peritoneal Catheter Insertion: Radiology Anthropometric Analysis for Determining Optimal Catheter Position

2020· article· en· W4396996551 on OpenAlexaffabout
David Clark, Meherzad Kutky, Karthik Tennankore, Arsh K. Jain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCatheterRadiologyFluoroscopySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Placement of a functioning peritoneal catheter requires optimal catheter positioning. Traditionally the pubis symphysis has been used as a landmark for the true pelvis and referenced for catheter-tip positioning. This practice is based on physical-exam methods without the benefit of fluoroscopic imaging. Methods: Retrospective cohort of adult, peritoneal dialysis patients in London, Ontario, who underwent percutaneous peritoneal catheter insertion using fluoroscopy spanning Feb 1, 2013 - Aug 1, 2017. Pre-specified anthropometric measures: 1) distance between deep pelvic space (outlined by caudal border of pooled radiocontrast injected intra-procedure) and cranial border of pubis symphysis; 2) distance between catheter-tip and cranial border of pubis symphysis - were measured using Citrix software of stored images. Anthropometric measures were contrasted according to sex via t-tests (p<0.05) and multivariable regression analyses, assessing relationships of potential predictors (age, BMI, prior abdominal surgery). Results: 295 patients (69% male) underwent fluoroscopic catheter insertion during the study period. Average age was 60 ± 16 years (std. dev.), BMI 28 ± 5 kg/m2. 52% of patients had no prior surgical history, 30% had 1 prior abdominal surgery, 18% had ≥2 prior surgeries. Average distance between deep pelvic space and pubis symphysis was 2.9 ± 1.5 cm, with females having a larger distance (3.4 ± 1.7 cm) compared to males (2.8 ± 1.4 cm; P=0.001); Female sex being associated with a 0.6 ± 0.2 cm, (P=0.03) increase in distance between the pubis symphysis and deep pelvic space as compared to males, adjusted for age, BMI, and number of prior abdominal surgeries. Stratified by sex: age, BMI, number of prior abdominal surgeries was not associated with distance between the pubic symphysis and deep pelvic space. Catheter-tip to pubis symphysis distance was 3.8 ± 1.7 cm and similar across sexes. Conclusions: Fluoroscopic methods of outlining the deep pelvic space for peritoneal catheter positioning approximate traditional methods. Differences observed in the distance between the pubic symphysis and deep pelvic space according to sex may reflect the impact of anatomical differences and/or type of abdominal surgeries. However, catheter tip positioning remained unaffected.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207