Clinical assessment of 5 Fr and 6 Fr Glidecath catheter for angiographic assessment of dogs with dilated cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advanced cardiac diseases in dogs are currently diagnosed and managed with cardiac fluoroscopic assessments and cath-lab based interventions. In India we do not have such advanced facilities for animals. However, dogs with high morbid cardiac diseases/complications are occurring in increasing rates. Novel procedures like trans-catheter interventions needs to be undertaken to manage such cardiac diseases. Clinical Cardiac Catheterizations and Image guided Interventions in Indian dogs and especially indigenous dogs were not undertaken so far. Clinical feasibility assessment studies were are lacking in India. This study six animals was undertaken to evaluate the utility of 5 Fr and 6 Fr Glidecath Catheters used in Human Medicine, for angiographic assessment in our non - descript dogs and Labrador dogs affected with Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Cardiac fluoroscopy was performed with general purpose C- arm (HF 59R C-Arm with Flat Panel Detector (FPD), which is used for multiple procedures like ortho, spinal/neuro, gastro, urology, etc. The procedure was done under general anesthesia. Cardiac catheterization was done using femoral access and the Glidecath catheter was advanced under C arm-guidance. By injecting the Iohexol contrast, the ventricle chamber perfusion was assessed. The Catheter was further advanced into the entry point of coronary artery and the coronary perfusion was assessed. Themerits and demerits of the procedure were assessed; Pre, intra and post proceduralfindings and recovery status were presented and discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".