PARTIAL OCCLUSION, LESS AKI: AN AORTA REGISTRY ANALYSIS OF PREBOA-PRO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Background: Noncompressible torso hemorrhage remains a leading cause of potentially preventable deaths. Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta (REBOA) has emerged as an adjunct temporizing hemorrhage control. The complete occlusion strategy with the ER-REBOA catheter can cause distal ischemia when used for longer than 30 min. To specifically address this limitation, the pREBOA-PRO catheter was developed. The objective of the current study is to investigate the impact of longer, partial occlusion times provided by pREBOA-PRO on acute kidney injury and mortality. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of the Aortic Occlusion for Resuscitation in Trauma and Acute Care Surgery registry as of August 2023. Patients in the pREBOA-PRO group (n = 110) receiving partial occlusion in Zone 1 were contrasted to patients in the ER-REBOA group (n = 752) treated with complete occlusion in Zone 1. Between-group comparisons included demographics, clinical presentation, aortic occlusion strategy, clinical complications, and mortality. Results: Demographics, clinical presentation, and mortality were indistinguishable between groups, except for age which was higher in the ER-REBOA group (44 vs. 38, P < 0.002). The partial aortic occlusion strategy was employed more often in the pREBOA-PRO group (87% vs. 33%, P < 0.05) and for longer periods (59 min vs. 50 min, P < 0.003). In contrast, AKI occurred less frequently in the pREBOA-PRO group (19% vs. 33%, P < 0.05). Conclusions: The more frequently partial and longer occlusion times in Zone 1 with the use of pREBOA-PRO resulted in lower AKI incidence suggesting that this newer device is a safer extended bridge to hemorrhage control.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".